THE  UNIVERSITY  ' 

OF  ILLINOIS  , 
LIBRARY 

From  the  Library 
of  the 

Diocese  of  Springfield 
Protestant  Episcopal 
Church 

Presented  1917 

% 

Z33 


Return  this  book  on  or  before  the 
Latest  Date  stamped  below.  A 
charge  is  made  on  all  overdue 
books. 

University  of  Illinois  Library 


# 


the  university 

OF  ILLINOIS”, 
LIBRARY 

From  the  Library 
of  the 

Diocese  of  Springfield 
Protestant  Episcopal 
Church 

Presented  1S17 

% 

233 


•if 


(Ik 


-  ■* 

*.  * 


*  \ 


V,  .> 


^  A 

r  0 


* 


a  ** 


THE  LIBRARY 
OF  THE 

OERSI1Y  of  moots 


# 


* 


EVIDENCES 


OF  THE 

\ 

AUTHENTICITY,  INSPIBATION, 

AND 

CANONICAL  AUTHORITY 

OF  THE 

HOLY  SCRIPTURES 


BY  THE 

REV.  ARCHIBALD  ALEXANDER, aD.D. 

Prof,  of  Theology  in  Theological  Seminary  at  Princeton, 


PHILADELPHIA: 

PRESBYTERIAN  BOARD  OF  PUBLICATION, 


* 


CONTENTS 


rv  o' j 

p\t  BGe 


CHAPTER  I. 

#  paq  a 

The  right  use  of  reason  in  religion, .  9 

CHAPTER  II. 

It  is  impossible  to  banish  all  religion  from  the  world,  and  if  it 
were  possible,  it  would  be  the  greatest  calamity  which  could 
befall  the  human  race, .  17 

CHAPTER  III. 

If  Christianity  be  rejected,  there  is  no  other  religion  which  can 
be  substituted  in  its  place,  at  least  no  other  which  will  at  all 
answer  the  purpose  for  which  religion  is  desirable, . 24 


CHAPTER  IV. 

Revelation  necessary  to  teach  us  how  to  worship  God  accept¬ 
ably — the  nature  and  certainty  of  a  future  state — and  espe¬ 
cially,  the  method  by  which  sinners  may  obtain  salvation, ...  34 

CHAPTER  V. 

There  is  nothing  improbable  or  unreasonable  in  the  idea  of  a 
revelation  from  God,  and  consequently  nothing  improbable  or 
unreasonable  in  such  a  manifest  divine  interposition,  as  may 
be  necessary  to  establish  a  revelation, .  61 


5 


6 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

PAOK 

Miracles  are  capable  of  proof  from  testimony, .  65 

CPIAPTER  VII. 

The  miracles  of  the  Gospel  are  credible, . . .  89 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

The  rapid  and  extensive  progress  of  the  Gospel,  by  instruments 
so  few  and  feeble,  is  a  proof  of  divine  interposition, . 118 

CHAPTER  IX. 

Prophecies  respecting  the  Jewish  nation  which  have  been  re¬ 
markably  fulfilled, . . .  130 

CHAPTER  X. 

Prophecies  relating  to  Nineveh,  Babylon,  Tyre,  &c., .  138 

CHAPTER  XI. 

Prophecies  respecting  Messiah — predictions  of  Christ  respect¬ 
ing  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem, . . .  159 

CHAPTER  XII. 

No  other  religion  possesses  the  same  kind  and  degree  of  evi¬ 
dence  as  Christianity  :  and  no  other  miracles  are  as  well 
attested  as  those  recorded  in  the  Bible, .  169 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

The  Bible  contains  internal  evidence  that  its  origin  is  divine,. .  186 


CONTENTS. 


7 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

The  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament  were  written 
by  the  inspiration  of  God ;  and  this  inspiration,  however  it 
may  be  distinguished,  was  plenary;  that  is,  the  writers  were 
under  an  infallible  guidance,  both  as  to  ideas  and  words ;  and 
yet  the  acquired  knowledge,  habits,  and  peculiar  dispositions, 
of  the  writers,  were  not  superseded, . . 

CHAPTER  XV. 

The  inspiration  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament, . 

CANONICAL  AUTHORITY  OP  THE  BOOKS  OP  SCRIPTURE. 

CHAPTER  XVI. 

The  importance  of  ascertaining  the  true  canon  of  Holy  Scrip, 
ture, . . . 

CHAPTER  XVII. 

The  care  with  which  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  were  pre¬ 
served — their  canonical  authority — the  sanction  given  to 
these  books  by  the  Saviour  and  his  apostles — and  the  method 
of  ascertaining  what  books  were  in  the  canon  at  the  time  of 
Christ's  advent, . . 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 

The  books  denominated  aprocryphal  have  no  just  claim  to  a 
place  among  the  canonical  Scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament, 

CHAPTER  XIX. 

Canon  of  the  New  Testament — method  of  settling  it — testi¬ 
mony  of  the  Church — constitution  of  the  canon — whence 
these  books  derive  their  authority — solicitude  of  early  Chris- 


PAGB 


222 


235 


245 


249 


258 


8 


CONTENTS. 


Pagh 

tians  to  obtain  these  books — their  care  to  distinguish  them 
from  others — autographs,  &c., . 266 

CHAPTER  XX. 

Testimonies  in  favour  of  the  canonical  authority  of  the  books 
of  the  New  Testament, .  278 

CHAPTER  XXI. 

Canonical  authority  of  Paul’s  Epistles, .  287 

CHAPTER  XXII. 

The  canonical  authority  of  the  seven  Catholic  epistles,  and  of 
the  book  of  Revelation, . . .  295 


CHAPTER  XXIII. 

Recapitulation  of  evidence  on  the  canon  of  the  New  Testament,  303 


EVIDENCES  OE  CHRISTIANITY. 


CHAPTER  I. 


THE  RIGHT  USE  OF  REASON  IN  RELIGION. 

That  it  is  the  right  and  the  duty  of  all  men  to  exer¬ 
cise  their  reason  in  inquiries  concerning  religion,  is  a 
truth  so  manifest,  that  it  may  be  presumed  there  are 
none  who  will  be  disposed  to  call  it  in  question. 

Without  reason  there  can  be  no  religion:  for  in 
every  step  which  we  take,  in  examining  the  eviden¬ 
ces  of  revelation,  in  interpreting  its  meaning,  or  in 
assenting  to  its  doctrines,  the  exercise  of  this  faculty 
is  indispensable. 

When  the  evidences  of  Christianity  are  exhibited, 
an  appeal  is  made  to  the  reason  of  men  for  its  truth ; 
but  all  evidence  and  all  argument  would  be  perfectly 
futile,  if  reason  were  not  permitted  to  judge  of  their 
force.  This  noble  faculty  was  certainly  given  to  man 
to  be  a  guide  in  religion,  as  well  as  in  other  things. 
He  possesses  no  other  means  by  which  he  can  form 
a  judgment  on  any  subject,  or  assent  to  any  truth; 
and  it  would  be  no  more  absurd  to  talk  of  seeing 
without  eyes,  than  of  knowing  any  thing  without 
reason. 

It  is  therefore  a  great  mistake  to  suppose  that  reli¬ 
gion  forbids  or  discourages  the  right  use  of  reason. 
So  far  from  this,  she  enjoins  it  as  a  duty  of  high 
moral  obligation,  and  reproves  those  who  neglect  to 
judge  for  themselves  what  is  right. 

It  has  frequently  been  said  by  the  friends  of  reve¬ 
lation,  that  although  reason  is  legitimately  exercised 


10 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


in  examining  the  evidences  of  revelation,  and  in 
determining  the  sense  of  the  words  hy  which  it  is 
conveyed;  yet  it  is  not  within  her  province  to  sit  in 
judgment  on  the  doctrines  contained  in  such  a  divine 
communication.  This  statement,  though  intended  to 
guard  against  the  abuse  of  reason,  is  not,  in  my  opin¬ 
ion,  altogether  accurate.  Without  reason  we  can 
form  no  conception  of  a  truth  of  any  kind;  and  when 
we  receive  any  thing  as  true,  whatever  may  be  the 
evidence  on  which  it  is  founded,  we  must  view  the 
reception  of  it  to  be  reasonable.  Truth  and  reason 
are  so  intimately  connected  that  they  can  never  with 
propriety  be  separated.  Truth  is  the  object,  and 
reason  is  the  faculty  by  which  it  is  apprehended, 
whatever  be  the  nature  of  the  truth,  or  of  the  evi¬ 
dence  by  which  it  is  established.  No  doctrine  can 
be  a  proper  object  of  our  faith  which  it  is  not  more 
reasonable  to  receive  than  to  reject.  If  a  book,  claim¬ 
ing  to  be  a  divine  revelation,  is  found  to  contain, 
doctrines  which  can  in  no  way  be  reconciled  to  right 
reason,  it  is  a  sure  evidence  that  those  claims  have 
no  solid  foundation,  and  ought  to  be  rejected.  But 
that  a  revelation  should  contain  doctrines  of  a  mys¬ 
terious  and  incomprehensible  nature,  and  entirely 
different  from  all  our  previous  conceptions,  and,  con¬ 
sidered  in  themselves,  improbable,  is  not  repugnant 
to  reason;  on  the  contrary,  judging  from  analogy, 
sound  reason  would  lead  us  to  expect  such  things  in 
a  revelation  from  God.  Every  thing  which  relates 
to  this  Infinite  being  must  be  to  us,  in  some  respects, 
incomprehensible.  Every  new  truth  must  be  dif¬ 
ferent  from  all  that  is  already  known ;  and  all  the 
plans  and  works  of  God  are  very  far  above  and 
beyond  the  conception  of  such  minds  as  ours.  Natu¬ 
ral  religion  has  as  great  mysteries  as  any  in  revela¬ 
tion  ;  and  the  created  universe,  as  it  exists,  is  as 
different  from  any  plan  which  men  would  have  con¬ 
ceived,  as  any  of  the  truths  contained  in  a  revelation 
can  be.  But  it  is  reasonable  to  believe  what  by  our 
senses  we  perceive  to  exist ;  and  it  is  reasonable  to 
believe  whatever  God  declares  to  be  true. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


11 


In  receiving  therefore  the  most  mysterious  doc¬ 
trines  of  revelation,  the  ultimate  appeal  is  to  reason : 
not  to  determine  whether  she  could  have  discovered 
these  truths;  not  to  declare  whether  considered  in 
themselves  they  appear  probable ;  but  to  decide  whe¬ 
ther  it  is  not  more  reasonable  to  believe  what  God 
speaks,  than  to  confide  in  our  own  crude  and  feeble 
conceptions.  Just  as  if  an  unlearned  man  should 
hear  an  able  astronomer  declare  that  the  diurnal 
motion  of  the  heavens  is  not  real  but  only  apparent, 
or  that  the  sun  is  nearer  to  the  earth  in  winter  than 
in  summer,  although  the  facts  asserted  appeared  to 
contradict  the  senses,  it  would  be  reasonable  to  ac¬ 
quiesce  in  the  declarations  made  to  him  by  one  who 
understood  the  subject,  and  in  whose  veracity  he 
had  confidence.  If  then  we  receive  the  witness  of 
men  in  matters  above  our  comprehension,  much 
more  should  we  receive  the  witness  of  God,  who 
knows  all  things,  and  cannot  deceive  his  creatures  by 
false  declarations. 

There  is  no  just  cause  for  apprehending  that  we 
shall  be  misled  by  the  proper  exercise  of  reason  on 
any  subject  which  may  be  proposed  for  our  consid¬ 
eration.  The  only  danger  is  of  making  an  improper 
use  of  this  faculty,  which  is  one  of  the  most  common 
faults  to  which  our  nature  is  liable.  Most  men  pro¬ 
fess  that  they  are  guided  by  reason  in  forming  their 
opinions;  hut  if  this  were  really  the  case,  the  world 
would  not  be  overrun  with  error ;  there  would  not  be 
so  many  absurd  and  dangerous  opinions  propagated 
and  pertinaciously  defended.  In  one  sense,  indeed, 
they  may  be  said  to  follow  reason,  for  they  are  guid¬ 
ed  by  a  blinded,  prejudiced,  and  perverted  reason. 

One  large  class  of  men  are  accustomed,  from  a 
slight  and  superficial  view  of  the  important  subject 
of  religion,  to  draw  a  hasty  conclusion,  which  must 
prove  in  the  highest  degree  detrimental  to  their 
happiness.  They  have  observed,  that  in  the  mod¬ 
ern  as  well  as  ancient  world,  there  is  much  super¬ 
stition,  much  imposture,  much  diversity  of  opinion 
and  variety  of  sects,  many  false  pretences  to  Divine 


12 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


inspiration,  and  many  false  reports  of  miracles  and 
prophetic  oracles.  Without  giving  themselves  the 
trouble  of  searching  diligently  for  the  truth  amidst 
the  various  contending  claims,  they  draw  a  general 
conclusion  that  all  religions  are  alike ;  that  the  whole 
affair  is  a  cheat,  the  invention  of  cunning  men  who 
imposed  on  the  credulity  of  the  unthinking  multi¬ 
tude;  and  that  the  claims  to  Divine  Revelation  do 
not  even  deserve  a  serious  examination.  Does  right 
reason  dictate  such  a  conclusion  as  this  ?  If  it  did, 
and  we  were  to  apply  it  to  all  other  concerns,  it 
would  make  a  sad  overturning  in  the  business  of 
the  world.  Truth,  honesty,  and  honour  might,  on 
these  principles,  be  discarded  as  unmeaning  names; 
for  of  all  these  there  have  been  innumerable  counter¬ 
feits,  and  concerning  all  of  them  an  endless  diversity 
of  opinion. 

A  second  class,  who  profess  to  be  men  of  reason, 
pay  more  attention  to  the  subject  of  religion ;  but 
their  reason  is  a  prejudiced  judge.  They  listen  with 
eagerness  to  all  that  can  be  said  against  revelation. 
They  read  with  avidity  the  books  written  against 
Christianity,  and  but  too  faithfully  treasure  up  every 
objection  to  religion;  but  her  advocates  never  obtain 
from  them  a  fair  hearing.  They  never  inquire  whe¬ 
ther  the  arguments  and  objections  which  appear  to 
them  so  strong,  have  not  been  refuted.  With  the 
means  of  conviction  within  their  reach,  they  remain 
firmly  fixed  in  their  infidelity;  and  as  long  as  they 
pursue  this  partial  method  of  investigation,  they  must 
ever  remain  in  the  same  darkness. 

A  third  class,  who  wish  to  be  considered  as  taking 
reason  for  their  guide,  are  under  the  dominion  of 
vicious  passions;  ambition,  avarice,  lust,  or  revenge. 
Men  of  this  character,  however  strong  their  intellect, 
or  extensive  their  erudition,  can  never  reason  impar¬ 
tially  on  any  subject  which  interferes  with  the  grati¬ 
fication  of  their  predominant  desires;  and  as  religion 
forbids,  under  severe  penalties,  all  irregular  passions 
and  vicious  indulgences,  they  pursue  it  with  malig¬ 
nant  hatred.  As  one  well  observes,  “  they  are  against 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  13 

religion  because  religion  is  against  them.”  Such 
men  never  reason  calmly  on  the  subject,  and  they 
are  incapable  of  receiving  any  benefit  from  the  argu¬ 
ments  of  others.  They  never  think  of  religion  but 
with  a  feeling  of  enmity;  they  never  speak  of  it  but 
in  the  language  of  sneer  or  abuse.  There  is  no  ob¬ 
ject  which  this  race  of  infidels  have  more  at  heart, 
than  to  root  up  every  principle  of  religion  from  the 
minds  of  men,  and  to  drive  it  from  the  earth,  so  that 
not  one  vestige  of  it  may  remain  to  give  them  tor¬ 
ment.  Voltaire  may  be  considered  as  the  leader  of 
this  band,  and  his  humble  imitators  have  been  too 
numerous  in  every  Christian  country. 

But  there  is  still  another  class  of  men,  more  distin¬ 
guished,  as  masters  of  reason,  than  those  who  have 
been  mentioned.  They  are  the  cold,  speculative, 
subtle  skeptics,  who  involve  themselves  in  a  thick 
mist  of  metaphysics,  attack  first  principles,  and  con¬ 
found  their  readers  with  paradoxes.  The  number 
of  those  who  belong  to  this  class  is  perhaps  not  large, 
but  they  are  formidable ;  for  while  the  other  enemies 
of  the  truth  scarcely  make  a  show  of  reason,  these 
philosophers  are  experienced  in  all  the  intricacies  of 
a  refined  logic ;  so  that  in  their  hands  error  is  made 
to  appear  in  the  guise  of  truth.  Should  we  yield 
ourselves  to  the  sophistry  of  these  men,  they  will  per¬ 
suade  us  to  doubt,  not  only  of  the  truth  of  revelation, 
but  of  our  senses  and  of  our  very  existence.  If  it  be 
inquired  how  they  contrive  to  spread  such  a  colour¬ 
ing  of  skepticism  over  every  subject,  the  answer  is, 
by  artfully  assuming  false  principles  as  the  premises 
of  their  reasoning;  by  reasoning  sophistically  on  cor¬ 
rect  principles;  by  the  dexterous  use  of  ambiguous 
terms ;  by  pushing  their  inquiries  beyond  the  limits 
of  human  knowledge;  and  by  calling  in  question  the 
first  principles  of  all  knowledge.  It  is  not  easy  to 
conjecture  what  their  motive  is;  most  probably  it  is 
vanity.  They  are  ambitious  of  appearing  more  pro 
found  and  acute  than  other  men,  and  distinction  is 
not  so  readily  obtained  in  the  common  course,  as  by 
flying  off  in  an  eccentric  orbit.  It  cannot  be  any 

2 


14 


EVIDENCES  OE  CHRISTIANITY. 


sincere  regard  for  truth  which  influences  them ;  for 
upon  their  principles,  truth  and  reason  are  equally 
worthless.  They  pull  down  every  thing,  but  build 
up  nothing.  Truth  has  no  greater  enemies  in  the 
world  than  this  Pyrrhonic  sect;  and  it  is  to  be  lamen¬ 
ted  that  sometimes  ingenious  young  men  are  caught 
in  the  wiles  of  their  sophistry,  and  are  led  so  far  into 
the  labyrinth  of  their  errors,  that  they  are  never  able 
to  extricate  themselves;  and  all  their  fair  prospects 
of  virtue  and  usefulness  are  obscured  for  ever. 

Before  I  leave  the  consideration  of  the  various 
classes  of  persons  who,  while  they  profess  to  be 
guided  by  reason,  make  an  improper  use  of  this 
faculty,  I  ought  to  mention  a  set  of  men,  distinguish¬ 
ed  for  their  learning  and  ingenuity,  who  profess  to 
receive  the  Christian  revelation  and  glory  in  the 
appellation  of  Rational  Christians.  They  proceed 
on  the  plausible  and  (if  rightly  understood)  correct 
principle  of  receiving  nothing  as  true  but  what  their 
reason  approves;  but  these  very  men,  with  all  their 
fair  appearances  of  rationality,  are  chargeable  with 
as  gross  a  dereliction  of  reason  as  can  well  be  con¬ 
ceived;  and,  in  regard  to  consistency,  are  more  vul¬ 
nerable  than  any  of  those  already  mentioned.  While 
they  admit  that  God  has  made  a  revelation,  they  in¬ 
sist  upon  the  right  of  bringing  the  truths  revealed  to 
the  test  of  human  judgment  and  opinion,  and  reject 
them  as  unreasonable  if  they  do  not  accord  with  this 
standard.  But  the  declaration  of  God  is  the  highest 
reason  which  we  can  have  for  believing  any  thing. 
To  set  up  our  opinion  against  the  plain  expression 
of  his  will,  is  surely  presumption  of  the  highest  kind. 
Perhaps,  however,  I  do  not  represent  the  case  with 
perfect  accuracy.  Perhaps  no  man  is  chargeable 
with  such  an  inconsistency,  as  to  admit  a  thing  to  be 
contained  in  an  undoubted  revelation,  and  yet  reject 
it.  The  exact  state  of  the  matter  is  this.  The  Scrip¬ 
tures,  it  is  admitted,  contain  a  revelation  from  God ; 
but  there  are  many  things  in  the  Bible,  which  if 
taken  in  the  most  obvious  sense,  are  inconsistent  with 
reason;  and  as  nothing  inconsistent  with  reason  can 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  15 

be  from  God,  it  is  concluded  that  this  cannot  be  the 
true  sense  of  Scripture.  Accordingly,  their  wits  are 
set  to  work,  and  their  learning  laid  under  contribu¬ 
tion,  to  invent  and  defend  some  other  sense.  Upon 
these  principles,  a  man  may  believe  just  as  much,  or 
as  little  as  he  pleases  of  what  the  Bible  contains; 
for  it  has  been  found,  that  no  text  is  so  stubborn 
as  not  to  yield  to  some  of  the  modes  of  treatment 
which  have  been  adopted.  This  whole  procedure  is 
contrary  to  right  reason.  The  plain  course  which 
reason  directs  us  to  pursue,  is,  after  examining  the 
evidences  of  revelation  until  we  are  satisfied,  to 
come  to  the  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures  with  an 
unbiased  mina ,  and  in  the  exercise  of  a  sound 
judgment,  and  with  the  aid  of  those  helps  and  rules 
which  reason  and  experience  suggest,  to  obtain  the 
sense  of  the  several  parts  of  the  document;  and  al¬ 
though  this  sense  may  contradict  our  preconceived 
opinions,  or  clash  with  our  inclinations,  we  ought 
implicitly  to  receive  it;  and  not  by  a  refined  ingenui¬ 
ty,  and  laboured  critical  process,  to  extort  a  meaning 
that  will  suit  our  own  notions.  This  is  not  to  form 
our  opinions  by  the  word  of  God,  but  to  cut  down 
the  sublime  and  mysterious  doctrines  of  revelation  to 
the  measure  of  our  narrow  conceptions.  In  the 
creed  of  many,  called  Rational  Christians,  the  divine 
system  of  heavenly  truth  is  shorn  of  its  glory,  and 
comes  forth  little  more  than  an  improved  theory  of 
Natural  Religion.  There  is  no  reason  in  this. 

But  what  if  the  plain  sense  of  Scripture  be  abso¬ 
lutely  repugnant  to  the  first  principles  of  reason? 
Let  that  be  demonstrated  and  the  effect  will  be  rather 
to  overthrow  the  Scriptures,  than  to  favour  such  a 
method  of  forming  a  theory  from  them.  But  no 
such  thing  can  he  demonstrated.  The  reasonings 
by  which  it  has  been  attempted  to  prove  that  the 
doctrines  commonly  called  orthodox  are  contrary  to 
reason,  and  fallacious,  and  a  similar  mode  of  reason¬ 
ing  on  truths  of  Natural  Religion,  will  land  us  in 
Atheism. 

Deistical  writers  have  been  fond  of  representing 


16 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


faith  and  reason  as  irreconcilable.  They  have  in 
sinuated  and  even  asserted,  that  revelation  cannot 
be  received  without  a  renunciation  of  reason;  and 
have  aifected  to  regret  that  it  should  he  subjected  to 
the  trial  of  a  rational  investigation,  which  they  allege 
it  can  by  no  means  bear.  This  was  a  favourite 
topic  with  Morgan,  Bolingbroke,  Voltaire,  and  Hume. 
The  last  mentioned  author,  in  the  close  of  his  Essay 
on  Miracles,  used  the  following  language :  “  Our 
most  holy  religion  is  founded  on  Faith,  not  on  rea¬ 
son,  and  his  a  sure  method  of  exposing  it,  to  put  it 
to  a  test,  which  it  is  by  no  means  fitted  to  endure.” 
— And  again:  “Mere  reason  is  insufficient  to  con¬ 
vince  ns  of  its  [the  Christian  religion’s]  veracity,  and 
whoever  is  moved  by  faith  to  assent  to  it,  is  conscious 
of  a  continual  miracle  in  his  own  person,  which  sub¬ 
verts  all  the  principles  of  his  understanding.” 

On  the  insidious  nature  of  this  attack,  I  shall  not 
stop  to  remark,  except  to  observe,  that  it  may  be 
taken  as  a  specimen  not  only  of  Hume’s  method  of 
treating  Christianity,  but  of  that  of  the  whole  tribe 
of  deistical  writers,  until  very  recently,  when  they 
have  come  out  boldly.  Under  the  mask  of  friend¬ 
ship,  and  with  words  of  respect  on  their  lips,  they 
have  aimed  the  mest  deadly  thrusts  at  the  vitals  of 
Christianity.  But  in  regard  to  the  sentiment  express¬ 
ed  in  this  extract,  the  friends  of  revelation  utterly 
disclaim  it,  and  hold  it  to  be  false  and  unfounded. 
The  state  of  the  controversy  between  Christians  and 
deists  did  not  authorize  any  such  assertion.  The 
defenders  of  the  truth  have  ever  been  ready  to  meet 
their  antagonists  on  the  ground  of  impartial  reason. 
They  have  met  them  at  every  point  where  they 
have  chosen  to  make  the  assault;  and  I  may  safely 
say,  that  no  deistical  argument  remains  unrefuted, 
no  infidel  objection  undetected  and  unexposed.  As 
Mr.  Hume  wrote  this  immediately  after  finishing  his 
argument  against  miracles,  he  may  have  felt  a  con¬ 
fidence  that  he  had  achieved  what  none  before  were 
able  to  effect.  But  his  confidence  was  premature; 
the  argument  which  he  claims  the  honour  of  having 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


17 


discovered,  (though  this  might  be  disputed  on  good 
ground)  has  been  refuted,  with  a  clearness  of  evi¬ 
dence  sufficient  to  bring  a  conviction  to  any  mind 
but  that  of  a  sophist  and  skeptic.  We  shall  have 
further  occasion,  in  the  sequel,  to  consider  the  force 
of  Mr.  Hume’s  reasoning  against  miracles. 

It  may  perhaps  require  some  apology,  that  a  sub¬ 
ject  which  has  been  so  fully  and  ably  discussed  in 
numerous  volumes,  should  be  attempted  to  be  treated 
in  a  short  essay.  My  only  apology  is  that  the  poison 
of  infidelity  is  imbibed  by  many,  who  never  have 
access  to  the  antidote.  It  is  much  to  be  regretted 
that  some  of  the  books  which  are  almost  sure  to  fall 
into  the  hands  of  literary  youth,  are  deeply  tinctured 
with  skepticism.  How  many  read  Hume  and  Gib¬ 
bon,  who  never  have  seen  the  answers  of  Campbell 
and  Watson!  Now  if  we  can  present  even  a  brief 
outline  of  the  evidences  of  Christianity  to  those  who 
may  not  be  disposed  to  read  larger  works,  we  may 
be  contributing,  in  some  small  degree,  to  prevent  the 
progress  of  one  of  the  greatest  evils  to  which  men 
are  liable. 


CHAPTER  II. 


IT  IS  IMPOSSIBLE  TO  BANISH  ALL  RELIGION  FROM  THE  WORLD,  AND  IF  IT 
WERE  POSSIBLE,  IT  WOULD  BE  THE  GREATEST  CALAMITY  WHICH  COULD 
BEFAL  THE  HUMAN  RACE. 

It  is  not  my  object  here  to  consider  religion  as  it  is 
a  matter  of  duty,  or  a  means  of  obtaining  happiness 
in  a  future  world;  for  both  these  would  be  equally 
disregarded  by  those  men  who  aim  at  the  subversion 
of  all  religion.  What  I  shall  attempt,  at  present,  is 
to  state  and  establish  the  fact,  that  man  is  so  consti¬ 
tuted  that  he  must  have  some  sort  of  religion. 

And  the  truth  of 'this  will  be  manifest  from  an 
inspection  of  the  principles  of  human  nature,  and 

2* 


18 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


from  the  history  of  the  world.  Man  has  naturally  a 
sense  of  moral  obligation,  a  perception  of  the  differ 
ence  between  right  and  wrong,  feelings  of  remorse 
or  approbation  on  the  review  of  his  conduct,  fears 
of  future  retribution  when  he  has  committed  a  crime, 
and  a  propensity  to  pay  religious  homage  to  some 
object  visible  or  invisible.  These  are  what  have 
been  called  his  religious  feelings ;  and  from  them  he 
has  received  the  appellation  of  a  religious  animal. 
And  certainly  there  is  nothing  by  which  man  is  so 
clearly  distinguished  from  the  creatures  below  him, 
as  this  capacity  for  religion;  for  whatever  indications 
they  give  of  sagacity  in  other  matters,  it  is  impossi¬ 
ble  to  communicate  to  them  any  ideas  of  morality, 
or  any  impressions  of  a  religious  nature.  That  these 
feelings  are  natural,  and  not  adventitious  is  manifest, 
because  they  are  found  to  exist  in  men  of  all  ages, 
of  all  countries,  and  in  every  different  state  of  socie¬ 
ty.  And  hence,  no  nation  ancient  or  modern,  has 
ever  been  found  without  some  kind  of  religion.  It 
would  be  as  difficult  to  find  a  whole  nation  without 
religion,  as  to  find  one  destitute  of  speech.  Some 
travellers,  it  is  true,  from  superficial  observation, 
have  reported  that  some  savage  tribes  had  no  ideas 
of  religion,  and  no  species  of  worship ;  but  on  more 
accurate  examination  it.  has  been  ascertained  that  this 
was  a  mistake.  And  from  our  present  knowledge 
of  the  nations  of  the  earth,  we  are  authorized  to 
assert  that  there  is  not  one  totally  destitute  of  some 
sense  of  religion  and  some  form  of  worship.  The 
same  thing  was  well  known  to  all  the  wisest  men  of 
antiquity.  It  is  a  fact  from  which  both  Plato  and 
Cicero  have  derived  many  important  conclusions. 
And  these  principles  of  our  nature  are  so  deeply 
radicated  that  they  never  can  be  removed.  Men 
may  be  induced  to  abandon  their  old  religion  and  to 
adopt  a  new  one ;  but  they  never  can  remain  long 
free  from  all  religion.  Take  away  one  object  of  wor¬ 
ship  and  they  will  soon  attach  themselves  to  another. 
If  unhappily  they  lose  the  knowledge  of  the  true 
God,  they  will  set  up  gods  of  their  own  invention 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


19 


or  receive  them  from  others. — The  history  of  all 
nations  bears  such  ample  testimony  to  this  fact  that 
it  cannot  be  denied.  Now,  this  universality  of  reli¬ 
gion  evinces,  in  the  clearest  manner,  that  the  prin¬ 
ciple  is  natural,  that  it  is  an  essential  thing  in  the 
constitution  of  man:  just  as  the  fact  that  men  are 
always  found  living  in  society,  proves  that  the  social 
principle  exists  and  is  natural  to  man.  % 

Atheistical  men  have  indeed  attempted  to  trace  all 
religious  feelings  and  all  rites  of  worship  to  the  craft 
of  priests  and  policy  of  rulers;  but  this  opinion  is  not 
only  unsupported  by  historical  testimony,  but  is  most 
unreasonable  in  itself.  For  if  there  had  not  existed 
a  predisposition  to  religion  in  the  minds  of  men,  such 
a  design  would  never  have  been  conceived;  and  if 
it  had,  all  attempts  to  introduce  into  the  minds  of 
men  ideas  so  foreign  to  their  nature,  must  have  been 
abortive. 

At  any  rate,  such  an  imposition  could  not  have 
continued  for  so  long  a  time,  and  could  not  have 
been  extended  to  every  tribe  and  nation  in  the  world. 
If  no  sense  of  religion  had  existed  in  the  minds  of 
men,  priests  and  politicians,  however  cunning,  would 
have  had  no  handle  to  take  hold  of,  no  foundation 
on  which  to  build.  Besides,  it  seems  to  be  forgotten 
by  the  advocates  of  this  hypothesis,  that  the  existence 
of  priests  supposes  the  previous  existence  of  religion. 

They  have  moreover  alleged  that  fear  produced 
the  gods.  Be  it  so;  it  still  confirms  the  position,  that 
there  is  something  in  the  nature  of  man  which  leads 
him  to  religion;  and  it  is  reasonable  to  conclude  that 
a  cause,  which  has  operated  uniformly  heretofore, 
will  continue  to  produce  the  same  effects  as  long  as 
the  world  stands.  It  is  impossible,  therefore,  to  ban¬ 
ish  all  religion  from  the  world. 

To  what  degree  atheists  have  succeeded  in  divest¬ 
ing  themselves  of  all  religious  impression,  I  do  not 
pretend  to  know.  That  some  men  have  gone  to  a 
great  length  in  counteracting  the  constitutional  ten¬ 
dencies,  and  extinguishing  the  feelings  of  nature,  is 
undoubtedly  true;  but  there  have  been  sufficient  in- 


20 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 


dications  to  lead  to  the  opinion  that  there  is  more  of 
affectation  than  reality  in  the  bravery  of  their  pro¬ 
fession.  It  is  known  that  some  of  them  have,  above 
other  men,  been  the  slaves  of  superstitious  fears ;  and 
that  others,  in  times  of  extreme  peril,  as  in  a  storm 
at  sea,  have  for  the  moment  renounced  their  atheism, 
and  cried  as  earnestly  for  mercy  as  those  around 
them.  Now*if  these  philosophers,  with  all  their  rea¬ 
soning,  are  not  able  to  erase  all  religious  impressions 
from  their  minds,  it  is  vain  to  attempt  to  banish  all 
religion  from  the  world. 

But  suppose  the  great  work  achieved,  and  that 
every  vestige  of  religion  were  obliterated,  what 
would  be  the  result?  Would  men  remain  without 
any  objects  of  religious  homage?  Would  they  never 
again  be  afraid  of  invisible  powers?  Would  the 
feelings  of  remorse  at  no  time  urge  them  to  perform 
some  sort  of  penance,  or  attempt  some  kind  of  expia¬ 
tion?  Would  no  impostors  and  false  prophets  arise 
to  deceive  the  world  again  with  their  dreams,  fancies, 
and  pretended  revelations?  They  must  have  made 
but  superficial  observations  on  human  nature,  who 
think  that  none  of  these  things  would  ever  occur. 

If  those  persons,  therefore,  who  oppose  Christiani¬ 
ty,  hope  by  its  suppression  to  get  rid  of  all  religion, 
they  do  greatly  deceive  themselves.  This  work  be¬ 
ing  accomplished,  they  would  soon  have  more  to 
perform  in  endless  progression.  Instead  of  the  pure, 
mild,  benignant  religion  of  Christ,  they  would  soon 
find  themselves  surrounded  by  superstitions  as  foul 
and  as  false,  as  monstrous  and  as  absurd,  as  any 
which  the  hotbed  of  paganism  ever  produced.  Look 
into  the  heathen  world,  and  see  the  abominations  and 
miseries  which  inveterate  superstition  perpetuates  in 
some  of  the  fairest  and  most  populous  regions  of  the 
globe.  Look  at  the  savage  tribes  of  Africa  and 
America,  and  contemplate  the  cruel  bondage  of  su¬ 
perstition  to  which  the  people  are  subjected.  Evils 
as  great  would  soon  grow  up  among  us,  were  it  not 
for  the  salutary  influence  of  Christianity.  Our  fore¬ 
fathers,  before  they  became  Christians,  were  in  the 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  21 

same  degraded  and  wretched  situation.  And  shall 
we  curse  our  posterity  by  bringing  back  those  evils 
from  which  our  fathers  escaped?  It  is  a  truth  which 
should  be  proclaimed  every  where  on  the  house  tops, 
that  it  is  the  Bible  which  has  delivered  us  from  the 
horrid  dominion  of  superstition,  and  it  is  the  Bible 
which  must  prevent  its  return.  Philosophy  has  had 
no  hand  in  working  out  this  deliverance  from  the 
horrors  of  idolatry.  With  all  her  celebrated  schools 
and  sages,  she  never  turned  one  individual  from  the 
worship  of  idols;  and  she  would-be  equally  powerless 
in  preventing  the  return  of  superstition,  if  other  bar¬ 
riers  were  removed. 

But  I  proceed  now  to  the  second  part  of  my  pro¬ 
position,  which  is,  that  if  religion  could  be  banished 
from  the  world,  it  would  be  the  greatest  calamity 
which  could  befal  the  human  race. 

It  has  formerly  been  a  matter  of  discussion  with 
the  learned,  whether  the  influence  of  superstition  or 
atheism  is  most  baneful  to  society.  Plutarch,  Bacon, 
Bayle,  Warburton,  and  others,  have  handled  this 
subject  in  a  learned  and  ingenious  manner,  and  ar¬ 
rived  at  very  different  conclusions.  However  doubt¬ 
ful  this  question  may  have  been  considered  in  former 
times,  I  believe  all  reflecting  men  are  now  pretty 
well  satisfied,  that  the  question  is  put  to  rest  for  ever. 
We  have  recently  beheld  the  spectacle  of  a  great 
nation  casting  off  contemptuously  the  religion  of  their 
fathers,  and  plunging  at  once  into  the  abyss  of  athe¬ 
ism.  We  have  seen  the  experiment  tried,  to  ascer¬ 
tain  whether  a  populous  nation  could  exist  without 
the  restraints  of  religion.  Every  circumstance  was 
as  favourable  to  the  success  of  the  experiment  as  it 
could  be.  Learning  was  in  its  highest  state  of  ad¬ 
vancement;  philosophy  boasted  of  an  approximation 
to  perfection;  refinement  and  politeness  had  never 
been  more  complete  among  any  people.  But  what 
was  the  result?  It  is  written  in  characters  of  blood. 
It  was  as  if  a  volcano  had  burst  upon  the  world,  and 
disgorged  its  fiery  flood  over  all  Europe.  Such  a 


22  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

scene  of  cruelty,  cold-blooded  malignity,  beastly  im¬ 
purity,  heaven  daring  impiety,  and  insatiable  rapa¬ 
ciousness,  the  world  never  witnessed  before,  and,  I 
trust  in  God,  will  never  witness  again.  The  only 
ray  of  hope  which  brightened  the  dismal  prospect 
was,  that  this  horrible  system  contained  in  itself  the 
principles  of  its  own  speedy  downfall.  Atheism  has 
no  bond  of  union  for  its  professors,  no  basis  of  mu¬ 
tual  confidence.  It  breeds  suspicion,  and  conse¬ 
quently  hatred  in  every  breast ;  and  it  is  actuated 
by  a  selfishness  which  utterly  disregards-  all  the 
bonds  of  nature,  of  gratitude,  and  of  friendship.  To 
an  atheist  fear  becomes  the  ruling  passion.  Con¬ 
scious  of  his  own  want  of  virtue,  honour,  and  hu¬ 
manity,  he  naturally  views  his  fellows  in  the  same 
light,  and  is  ready  to  put  them  out  of  the  way  as 
soon  as  they  appear  to  become  obstacles  to  the  ac¬ 
complishment  of  his  plans.  Hence  the  bloody  actors 
in  this  tragedy,  after  glutting  their  revenge,  by  shed¬ 
ding  the  blood  of  innocent  Christians  and  unoffend¬ 
ing  priests,  turned  their  murderous  weapons  against 
each  other.  Not  satisfied  with  inflicting  death  on 
the  objects  of  their  suspicion  or  envy,  they  actually 
feasted  their  eyes  daily,  with  the  streams  of  blood 
which  incessantly  flowed  from  the  guillotine.  Never 
was  the  justice  of  heaven  against  impious  and  cruel 
men  more  signally  displayed,  than  in  making  these 
miscreants  the  instruments  of  vengeance  upon  each 
other.  The  general  state  of  morals  in  France,  dur¬ 
ing  the  period  in  which  Christianity  was  proscribed, 
and  atheism  reigned,  was  such  as  almost  exceeds 
belief.  An  eye-witness  of  the  whole  scene,  and  ail 
actor  in  some  parts  of  it,  has  drawn  the  follow¬ 
ing  sketch: — “ Multiplied  cases  of  suicide;  prisons 
crowded  with  innocent  persons;  permanent  guillo¬ 
tines;  perjuries  of  all  classes;  parental  authority  set 
at  naught  ;  debauchery  encouraged  by  an  allowance 
to  those  called  unmarried  mothers:  nearly  six  thou¬ 
sand  divorces  within  the  single  city  of  Paris,  within 
a  little  more  than  two  years  after  the  law  authorized 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  .23 

them; — in  a  word,  whatever  is  most  obscene  in  vice, 
and  most  dreadful  in  ferocity!”*  If  these  be  the 
genuine  fruits  of  atheism,  then  let  us  rather  have 
superstition  in  its  most  appalling  form.  Between 
atheism  and  superstition  there  is  this  great  difference ; 
the  latter  may  authorize  some  crimes,  the  former 
opens  the  flood-gates  to  all. .  The  one  restrains  par¬ 
tially,  the  other  removes  all  restraint  from  vice. 
Every  kind  of  religion  presents  some  terrors  to  evil 
doers;  atheism  promises  complete  immunity,  and 
stamps  virtue  itself  with  the  character  of  folly. 

But  we  must  not  suppose' that  the  whole  mass  of 
the  French  people  became  atheists  during  this  period. 
Far  from  it.  A  large  majority  viewed  the  whole 
scene  with  horror  and  detestation;  but  the  atheistical 
philosophers  had  the  power  in  their  hands;,  and, 
though  a  small  minority  of  the  nation,  were  able  to 
effect  so  much  mischief.  But  from  this  example  we 
may  conjecture  what  must  be  the  state  of  things,  if 
the  whole  mass  of  people  in  a  nation  should  become 
atheists,  or  be  freed  from  all  the  restraints  of  con¬ 
science  and  religion.  Such  an  event  will  never  occur, 
but  if  it  should,  all  must  acknowledge  that  no  greater 
calamity  could  be  imagined.  It  would  be  a  lively 
picture  of  hell  upon  earth;  for  what  is  there  in  the 
idea  of  hell  more  horrible  than  the  absence  of  all  re¬ 
straint  and  all  hope,  and  the  uncontrolled  dominion 
of  the  most  malignant  passions?  But  there  would 
be  one  remarkable  point  of  difference,  for  while  athe¬ 
ists  deny  the  God  that  made  them,  the  inhabitants 

of  hell  BELIEVE  AND  TREMBLE. 

*  Gregoire. 


24 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 


CHAPTER  III. 

s  »  * 

IF  CHRISTIANITY  BE  REJECTED,  THERE  IS  NO  OTHER  RELIGION  WHICH  CAN 
BE  SUBSTITUTED  IN  ITS  PLACE;  AT  LEAST  NO  OTHER  WHICH  WILL  AT 
ALL  ANSWER  THE  PURPOSE  FOR  WHICH  RELIGION  IS  DESIRABLE. 

It  has  been  proved  in  the  former  section,  that  it  is 
necessary  to  have  some  religion.  We  are  already  in 
possession  of  Christianity,  which,  by  the  confession  of 
deists  themselves,  answers  many  valuable  purposes. 
It  behoves*  us,  therefore,  to  consider  well  what  we 
are  likely  to  obtain  by  the  exchange,  if  we  should 
relinquish  it.  If  any  man  can  show  us  a  better  reli¬ 
gion,  and  founded  on  better  evidences,  we  ought  to 
give  it  up  willingly;  but  if  this  cannot  be  done,  then 
surely  it  is  not  reasonable  to  part  with  a  certain  good, 
without  receiving  an  equivalent.  This  would  be,  as 
if  some  persons  sailing  on  the  ocean  in  a  vessel  which 
carried  them  prosperously,  should  determine  to  aban¬ 
don  it  without  knowing  that  there  was  any  other  to 
receive  them,  merely  because  some  of  the  passengers, 
pretending  to  skill,  suggested  that  it  was  leaky,  and 
would  sooner  or  later  founder. 

Let  the  enemies  of  Christianity  tell  us  plainly  what 
their  aim  is,  and  what  they  design  to  substitute  in 
the  place  of  the  Bible.  This,  however,  they  are  un¬ 
able  to  perform :  and  yet  they  would  have  us  to  con¬ 
sent  to  give  up  our  dearest  hopes  without  knowing 
what  we  are  to  receive,  or  whether  we  are  to  receive 
any  thing  to  compensate  for  the  loss. 

This  is  a  point  of  vital  importance,  and  demands 
our  most  serious  attention.  If  it  is  really  intended  to 
substitute  some  other  religion  in  the  place  of  Chris¬ 
tianity,  we  ought  certainly,  before  we  make  the  ex¬ 
change,  to  have  the  opportunity  of  examining  its 
claims,  that  we  may  know  whether  it  will  be  likely 
to  answer  the  purposes  for  which  religion  is  wanted. 
To  bring  this  subject  fairly  into  view,  let  us  take  a 


EVIDENCES  OE  CHRISTIANITY.  25 

survey  of  the  world,  and  inquire,  what  it  has  to  pro¬ 
pose  for  our  selection,  if  we  should  renounce  Chris¬ 
tianity 

There  are  only  three  things,  in  that  event,  among 
which  we  must  choose.  The  first,  to  adopt  some  of 
the  existing  or  some  of  the  exploded  systems  of  Pa¬ 
ganism;  the  second,  to  accept  the  Koran  instead  of 
the  Bible;  and  the  third,  to  embrace  Natural  Reli¬ 
gion  or  pure  deism. 

Few  men  have  had  the  effrontery  to  propose  a 
return  to  Paganism;  yet  even  this  has  not  been  too 
extravagant  for  some  whose  names  stand  high  as 
men  of  literature.  The  learned  Gibbon  has  not,  that 
I  recollect,  expressed  his  opinion  on  this  subject 
explicitly;  but  it  may  be  fairly  inferred,  from  many 
things  in  his  History  of  tlffe  Decline  and  Fall  of  the 
Roman  empire,  that  he  deeply  regretted  the  subver¬ 
sion  of  the  old  Pagan  systems,  and  that  the  progress 
of  Christianity  was  far  from  affording  him  any  plea¬ 
sure. 

But  although  he  makes  it  sufficiently  manifest  that, 
could  his  wishes  have  governed  past  events,  the  old 
systems  would  never  have  been  disturbed,  and  Chris¬ 
tianity  never  have  had  a  footing;  yet  we  cannot  say 
whether  he  would  have  given  his  vote  to  have  the 
temples  rebuilt  and  the  Pagan  rites  restored.  It  is 
difficult  to  tell  what  he  wished  to  accomplish  by  his 
opposition  to  Christianity;  or  whether  he  had  any 
definite  view,  except  to  manifest  his  hatred  to  the 
gospel  and  its  Author. 

Taylor,  the  learned  translator  of  Plato,  openly 
avowed  his  predilection  for  the  religion  of  the  Athe¬ 
nian  philosopher,  and  his  wish  that  it  might  be  re¬ 
vived;  and  speaks  in  contemptuous  terms  of  Chris¬ 
tianity,  in  comparison  with  Platonism;  but  he  never 
could  have  supposed  that  to  be  a  suitable  religion 
for  the  bulk  of  men,  which  had  not  the  least  influ¬ 
ence  upon  them  while  the  philosoper  lived.  This, 
then,  would  be  no  substitute  for  Christianity;  for  un¬ 
der  its  benign  influence,  even  the  poor  have  the 

GOSPEL  PREACHED  UNTO  THEM.  Blit  I  have  110  doubt 

3 


26 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


that,  if  the  truth  could  be  ascertained,  we  should  find 
that  this  sublime  genius  derived  some  of  his  best 
ideas  directly  or  indirectly  from  the  Scriptures;  and 
that  if  he  had  lived  under  the  light  of  the  gospel,  he 
would  never  have  spoken  of  it  as  his  translator  has 
done. 

In  the  time  of  the  revolution  in  France,  after  some 
trial  had  been  made  of  having  no  religion,  D’Auber- 
menial  proposed  a  new  religion,  in  imitation  of  the 
ancient  Persians.  His  plan  was  to  have  the  Deity 
represented  by  a  perpetual  fire  and  offerings  made  to 
him  of  fruits,  oil,  and  salt;  and  libations  poured  out 
to  the  four  elements.  It  was  prescribed,  that  worship 
should  be  celebrated  daily  in  the  temple,  that  every 
ninth  day  should  be  a  Sabbath,  and  that  on  certain 
festivals  all  ages  should  unite  in  dances.  A  few 
fanatics  in  Paris  and  elsewhere,  actually  adopted  the 
new  religion,  but  they  were  unable  to  attract  any 
notice,  and  in  a  little  time  it  sunk  into  merited  obli¬ 
vion. 

It  has  been  common  enough  to  set  up  the  Moham¬ 
medan  religion  in  a  sort  of  rival  comparison  with 
Christianity,  but  I  do  not  know  that  any  have  gone 
so  far  as  to  prefer  the  Koran  to  the  Bible,  except 
those  few  miserable  apostates,  who,  after  being  long 
“  tossed  about  with  every  wind  of  doctrine/5  at 
length  threw  themselves  into  the  arms  of  the  Arabi¬ 
an  impostor.  How  far  this  religion  can  bear  a  com 
parison  with  Christianity,  will  be  seen  in  the.  sequel. 

Deism,  then,  or  Natural  Religion,  is  the  only  hope 
of  the  world,  if  the  Christian  Religion  be  rejected. 
The  first  English  deists  extolled  Natural  Religion  to 
the  skies,  as  a  system  which  contained  all  that  man 
needed  to  know;  and  as  being  simple  and  intelligible 
to  the  meanest  capacity.  But  strange  to  tell,  scarce¬ 
ly  any  two  of  them  are  agreed  what  Natural  Reli¬ 
gion  is;  and  the  same  discordance  has  existed  among 
their  successors.  They  are  not  agreed  even  in  those 
points  which  are  most  essential  in  religion,  and  most 
necessary  to  be  settled  before  any  religious  worship 
can  be  instituted..  They  differ  on  such  points  as 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  27 

these ;  whether  there  is  any  intrinsic  difference  be¬ 
tween  right  and  wrong;  whether  God  pays  any  re¬ 
gard  to  the  affairs  of  men;  whether  the  soul  is  im¬ 
mortal;  whether  prayer  is  proper  and  useful ;  and 
whether  any  external  rites  of  worship  are  neces¬ 
sary. 

Again,  if  deism  be  the  true  religion,  why  has  piety 
never  flourished  among  its  professors?  why  have 
they  not  been  the  most  zealous  and  consistent  wor¬ 
shippers  of  God?  Does  not  truth  promote  piety? 
and  will  it  not  ever  be  the  case  that  they  who  hold 
the  truth  will  love  God  most  ardently,  and  serve  him 
most  faithfully  ?  But  what  is  the  fact  in  regard  to 
this  class  of  men  ?  Have  they  ever  been  distinguish¬ 
ed  for  their  spirit  of  devotion;  have  they  produced 
numerous  instances  of  exemplary  piety?  It  is  so 
much  the  reverse,  that  even  the  asking  such  reason¬ 
able  questions  has  the  appearance  of  ridicule.  And 
when  people  hear  the  word  “  pious  deist,”  they 
have  the  same  sort  of  feeling  as  when  mention  is 
made  of  an  honest  thief,  or  a  sober  drunkard. 

There  is  no  slander  in  making  this  statement,  for 
deists  do  not  affect  to  be  pious.  They  have  no  love 
for  devotion.  If  the  truth  were  known,  this  is  the 
very  thing  they  wish  to  get  rid  of ;  and  if  they  be¬ 
lieved  that  professing  themselves  to  be  deists  laid 
them  under  greater  obligations  to  be  devout,  they 
would  not  be  so  zealous  for  the  system.  Believe  me, 
the  contest  is  not  between  one  religion  and  another, 
it  is  between  religion  and  irreligion.  It  is  impossible 
that  a  man  of  truly  pious  temper  should  reject  the 
Bible,  even  if  he  were  unacquainted  with  its  histori¬ 
cal  evidences.  He  would  find  it  to  be  so  congenial 
to  his  taste,  and  so  salutary  in  its  effects  on  his  own 
spirit,  that  he  would  conclude  that  it  must  have  deri¬ 
ved  its  origin  from  heaven.  But  we  find  no  such 
spirit  in  the  writings  of  deists.  There  is  not  in  them 
a  tincture  of  piety;  but  they  have  more  than  a  sprink¬ 
ling  of  profane  ridicule.  When  you  turn  to  them 
from  the  Bible,  you  arc  sensible  of  as  great  a  transi¬ 
tion,  as  if  you  passed  suddenly  from  a  warm  and 


28  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

genial  climate  into  the  frigid  zone.  If  deists  expect 
ever  to  conciliate  regard  for  their  religion  they  must 
appear  to  be  truly  pious  men,  sincerely  engaged  in 
the  service  of  God;  and  this  will  have  more  effect 
than  all  their  arguments.  But  whenever  this  event 
shall  occur,  they  will  be  found  no  longer  opposing 
the  Bible,  but  will  esteem  it  as  the  best  of  books,,  and 
will  come  to  it  for  fuel  to  feed  the  flame  of  pure 
devotion.  An  African  prince,  who  was  brought  to 
England  and  resided  there  some  time,  being  asked 
what  he  thought  of  the  Bible,  answered,,  that  he 
believed  it  to  be  from  God,  for  he  found  all  the 
good  people  in  favour  of  it,  and  all  the  bad  people 
against  it ! 

The  want  of  a  spirit  of  piety  and  devotion,  must 
be  reckoned  the  principal  reason  why  the  deists  have 
never  been  able  to  establish  and  keep  up  any  reli¬ 
gious  worship  among  themselves.  The  thing  has 
been  attempted  at  several  different  times  and  in  dif¬ 
ferent  countries,  but  never  with  success. 

It  is  said,  that  the  first  enterprise  of  this  kind  was 
that  of  David  Williams,  an  Englishman,  who  had 
been  a  dissenting  minister  in  Liverpool,  but  passing 
over  first  to  Socinianism,  and  then  to  deism,  went  to 
London,  where,  being  patronized  by  some  persons 
of  influence,  he  opened  a  house  for  deistical  worship, 
and.  formed  a  liturgy,  consisting  principally  of  praise 
to  the  Creator.  Here  he  preached  for  a  short  time, 
and  collected  some  followers;  but  he  complained 
that  most  of  his  congregation  went  on  to  atheism. 
After  four  years’  trial,  the  scheme  came  to  nothing. 
There  were  neither  funds  nor  congregation  remain¬ 
ing,  and  the  Priest  of  Nature,  (as  Williams  styled 
himself)  through  discouragement  and  ill  health,  aban¬ 
doned  the  project. 

Some  feeble  attempts  of  the  same  kind  have  been 
made  in  the  United  States;  but  they  are  unworthy 
of  being  particularly  noticed. 

Frederick  II.,  the  deistical  king  of  Prussia,  had 
once  formed  the  plan  of  a  Pantheon  in  Berlin  for  the 
worshippers  of  all  sects  and  all  religions,  the  chief 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


29 


object  of  which  was  the  subversion  of  Christianity; 
but  the  scheme  was  never  carried  into  execution. 

The  most  interesting  experiment  of  this  kind  was 
that  made  by  the  Theophilanthropists  in  France, 
during  the  period  of  the  revolution.  After  some  trial 
had  been  made  of  atheism  and  irreligion,  and  when 
the  want  of  public  worship  was  felt  by  many  reflect¬ 
ing  persons,  a  society  was  formed  for  the  worship  of 
God,  upon  the  pure  principles  of  Natural  Religion. 
Among  the  patrons  of  this  society,  were  men  beloved 
for  their  philanthropy,  and  distinguished  for  their 
learning,  and  some  high  in  power. 

La  Revelliere  Lepaux,  one  of  the  directory  of 
France,  was  a  zealous  patron  of  the  new  religion. 
By  his  influence,  permission  was  obtained  to  make 
use  of  the  churches  for  their  worship.  In  the  city 
of  Paris  alone,  eighteen  or  twenty  were  assigned  to 
them,  among  which  was  the  cathedral  church  of 
Notre  Dame. 

Their  creed  was  simple,  consisting  of  two  great 
articles,  the  existence  of  God,  and  the  immor¬ 
tality  of  the  soul.  Their  moral  system  also  em¬ 
braced  two  great  principles,  the  love  of  God,  and 
the  love  of  man  ; — which  were  indicated  by  the 
name  Theophilanthropists.  Their  worship  consisted 
of  prayers  and  hymns  of  praise,  which  were  compre¬ 
hended  in  a  manual  prepared  for  a  directory  in  wor¬ 
ship.  Lectures  were  delivered  by  the  members, 
which,  however,  underwent  the  inspection  of  the 
society,  before  they  were  pronounced  in  public.  To 
these  were  added  some  simple  ceremonies,  such  as 
placing  a  basket  of  fruit  and  flowers  on  the  altar. 
Music,  vocal  and  instrumental,  was  used;  for  the 
latter,  they  availed  themselves  of  the  organs  in  the 
churches.  Great  efforts  were  made  to  have  tins 
worship  generally  introduced  in  all  the  principal 
towns  in  France;  and  the  views  of  the  society  were 
even  extended  to  foreign  countries.  Their  manual 
was  sent  into  all  parts  of  the  republic  by  the  Minister 
of  the  interior,  free  of  expense. 

Never  did  a  society  enjoy  greater  advantages  at 

3* 


30 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


its  commencement.  Christianity  had  been  rejected 
with  scorn;  atheism  had  for  a  short  time  been  tried, 
but  was  found  to  be  intolerable  ;  the  government 
was  favourable  to  the  project;  men  of  learning  and 
influence  patronized  it,  and  churches  ready  built 
were  at  the  service  of  the  new  denomination.  The 
system  of  Natural  Religion  which  was  adopted  was 
the  best  that  could  have  been  selected,  and  consider- 
able  wisdom  was  discovered  in  the  construction  of 
their  liturgy.  But  with  all  these  circumstances  in 
their  favour,  the  society  could  not  subsist.  At  first, 
indeed,  while  the  scene  was  novel,  large  audiences 
attended,  most  of  whom  however  were  merely  spec¬ 
tators;  but  in  a  short  time,  they  dwindled  away  to 
such  a  degree,  that  instead  of  occupying  twenty 
churches  in  Paris,  they  needed  only  four;  and  in 
some  of  the  provincial  towns,  where  they  began 
under  the  most  favourable  auspices,  they  soon  came 
to  nothing.  Thus  they  went  on  declining  until, 
under  the  consular  government,  they  were  prohibited 
the  use  of  the  churches  any  longer;  upon  which  they 
immediately  expired  without  a  struggle,  and  it  is 
believed  that  not  a  vestige  of  the  society  now  re¬ 
mains. 

It  will  be  instructive  and  interesting  to  inquire 
into  the  reasons  of  this  want  of  success,  in  a  society 
enjoying  so  many  advantages.  Undoubtedly,  the 
chief  reason  was,  the  want  of  a  truly  devotional 
spirit.  This  was  observed  from  the  beginning  of 
their  meetings.  There  was  nothing  to  interest  the 
feelings  of  the  heart.  Their  orators  might  be  men 
of  learning,  and  might  produce  good  moral  discourses, 
but  they  were  not  men  of  piety,  and  not  always  men 
of  pure  morals.  Their  hymns  were  said  to  be  well 
composed,  arid  the  music  good;  but  the  musicians 
were  hired  from  the  stage.  There  was  also  a  strange 
defect  of  liberality  in  contributing  to  the  funds  of  the 
society.  They  found  it  impossible  to  raise,  in  some 
of  their  societies,  a  sum  which  every  Christian  con¬ 
gregation,  even  the  poorest  of  any  sect,  would  have 
collected  in  one  day.  It  is  a  fact,  that  one  of  the 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


31 


societies  petitioned  government  to  grant  them,  relief 
from  a  debt  which  they  had  contracted  in  providing 
the  apparatus  of  their  worship,  not  amounting  to 
more  than  fifty  dollars,  stating,  that  their  annual 
income  did  not  exceed  twenty  dollars.  In  the  other 
towns  their  musicians  deserted  them,  because  they 
were  not  paid,  and  frequently  no  person  could  be 
found  to  deliver  lectures. 

Another  difficulty  arose  which  might  have  been 
foreseen.  Some  of  the  societies  declared  themselves 
independent,  and  would  not  agree  to  be  governed 
by  the  manual  which  had  been  received,  any  further 
than  they  chose.  They'  also  remonstrated  against 
the  authority  exercised  by  the  lecturers  in  the  affairs 
of  the  society,  and  declared  that  there  was  danger 
of  their  forming  another  hierarchy.  There  were  also 
complaints  against  them  addressed  to  the  ministers 
by  the  agents  of  government  in  the  provinces,  on 
account  of  the  influence  which  they  might  acquire  in 
civil  affairs. 

The  Theophilanthropists  were  moreover  censured 
by  those  who  had  made  great  advances  in  the  mod¬ 
ern  philosophy,  for  their  illiberality.  It  was  com¬ 
plained  that  there  were  many  who  could  not  receive 
their  creed,  and  all  such  must  necessarily  be  excluded 
from  their  society.  This  censure  seems  to  have  trou¬ 
bled  them  much,  and  in  order  to  wipe  off  the  stigma 
they  appointed  a  fete,  which  they  called  the  anniver¬ 
sary  of  the  re-establishment  of  Natural  Religion.  To 
prove  that  their  liberality  had  no  bounds,  they  pre¬ 
pared  five  banners  to  be  carried  in  procession.  On 
the  first  was  inscribed  the  word,  Religion  ;  on  the 
second,  Morality:  and  on  the  others,  respectively, 
Jews,  Catholics,  Protestants.  When  the  pro¬ 
cession  was  over,  the  bearers  of  the  several  banners 
gave  each  other  the  kiss  of  peace;  and  that  none 
might  mistake  the  extent  of  their  liberality,  the  ban¬ 
ner  inscribed  Morality  was  borne  by  a  professed 
atheist,  universally  known  as  such  in  Paris.  They 
had  also  other  festivals  peculiar  to  themselves,  and 
four  in  honour  of  the  following  persons;  Socrates, 


\ 


32  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

St.  Vincent  de  Paul,  J.  J.  Rousseau,  and  Washing* 
ton  : — a  strange  conjunction  of  names  truly.* 

I  have  been  thus  particular  in  giving  an  account 
of  this  society,  because  the  facts  furnish  the  strongest 
confirmation  of  my  argument,  and  are  in  themselves 
curious  and  instructive.  After  the  failure  of  this 
enterprise,  deists  will  scarcely  attempt  again  to  in¬ 
stitute  any  form  of  public  worship. 

But  among  those  philosophers  who  believe  in  the 
perfectibility  of  human  nature  under  the  fostering 
influence  of  increasing  knowledge  and  good  govern¬ 
ment,  there  is  a  vague  theory  of  a  kind  of  mental, 
philosophical  religion,  which  needs  the  aid  of  no 
external  forms.  The  primary  articles  of  their  creed 
are,  that  religion  is  a  thing  entirely  between  God. 
and  every  man’s  conscience ;  that  all  our  Creator 
requires  is  the  homage  of  the  heart;  that  if  we  feel 
reverence,  gratitude,  and  submission  towards  him, 
and  act  our  part  well  in  society,  we  have  fulfilled 
our  duty;  that  we  cannot  know  how  we  may  be 
disposed  of  hereafter,  and  ought  not  to  be  anxious 
about  the  matter.  Whether  this  is  expected  to  be 
the  religion  of  philosophers  only,  or  also  of  the  un¬ 
learned  and  the  great  mass  of  labouring  people,  I  am 
unable  to  say.  But  I  know  that  such  a  system  as 
this  will,  to  a  large  majority  of  every  community, 
be  equivalent  to  no  religion  at  all.  The  great  body 
of  the  people  must  have  something  tangible,  some¬ 
thing  visible,  in  their  religion.  They  need  the  aid 
of  the  senses,  and  of  the  social  principle,  to  fix  their 
attention,  to  create  an  interest,  and  to  excite  the 
feelings  of  devotion.  The  truth  is,  that  if  the  heart 
be  afl'ected  with  lively  emotions  of  piety,  it  will  be 
pleasant,  it  will  be  useful,  and  it  will  be  natural,  to 
give  them  expression.  This  will  hold  in  regard  to 
philosophers  and  men  of  learning,  as  well  as  others. 
Wherever  a  number  of  persons  participate  in  the 
same  feelings,  there  is  a  strong  inclination  to  hold 
communion  together ;  and  if  sentiments  of  genuine 

*  Histoire  de  la  Theophilanthropie,  par.  M.  Gregoire. — See  Quar¬ 
terly  Review  for  January,  1823. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


33 


piety  exist  in  the  bosoms  of  many,  they  will  delight 
to  celebrate  in  unison  the  praises  of  that  Being  whom 
they  love  and  adore.  There  is  no  reason  why  pious 
emotions  more  than  others  should  be  smothered,  and 
the  tendency  to  express  them  counteracted.  Such 
indeed  will  never  be  the  fact.  “  Out  of  the  abund¬ 
ance  of  the  heart  the  mouth  speaketh.”  Piety,  it  is 
true,  consists  essentially  in  the  exercises  of  the  heart; 
but  that  religion  which  is  merely  mental,  is  suspi¬ 
cious;  at  best  very  feeble';  is  not  likely  to  produce 
any  permanent  effect  on  the  character  or  comfort  of 
the  person  entertaining  it;  and  cannot  be  useful  to 
others  in  the  way  of  example. 

In  the  year  1S02,  when  Christianity,  which  had 
been  proscribed  in  France,  was  restored  by  an  act 
of  government,  a’  speech  was  delivered  by  one  of 
the  counsellors  of  state  which  contains  excellent 
sentiments  on  the  subject  here  treated.  One  or  two 
extracts  will  not  be  unacceptable  to  the  reader. 
“  Science  can  never  be  partaken  of  but  by  a  small 
number,  but  by  religion  one  may  be  instructed  with¬ 
out  being  learned.  The  Natural  Religion  to  which 
one  may  rise  by  the  effects  of  a  cultivated  reason,  is 
merely  abstract  and  intellectual,  and  unfit  for  any 
people.  It  is  revealed  religion  which  points  out  all 
the  truths  that  are  useful  to  men  who  have  neither 
time  nor  means  for  laborious  disquisitions.  Who 
then  would  wish  to  dry  up  that  sacred  spring  of 
knowledge  which  diffuses  good  maxims,  brings  them 
before  the  eyes  of  every  individual,  and  communi¬ 
cates  to  them  that  authoritative  and  popular  dress, 
without  which  they  would  be  unknown  to  the  mul¬ 
titude  and  almost  to  all  men  ?  For  want  of  a  reli¬ 
gious  education  for  the  last  ten  years,  our  children 
are  without  any  ideas  of  a  divinity,  without  any 
notion  of  what  is  just  and  unjust;  hence  arise  bar¬ 
barous  manners,  hence  a  people  becomes  ferocious. 
One  cannot  but  sigh  over  the  lot  which  threatens  the 
present  and  future  generations.  Alas!  what  have 
we  gained  by  deviating  from  the  path  pointed  out 
to  us  by  our  ancestors?  What  have  we  gained  by 


34 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


substituting  vain  and  abstract  doctrines  for  the  creed 
which  actuated  the  minds  of  Turenne,  Fenelon,  and 
Pascal?”  The  unhappy  condition  of  that  genera¬ 
tion  who  grew  up  after  this  time  in  France,  in  regard 
to  religion,  is  repeatedly  noticed  by  Allison,  in  his 
history  of  Europe. 

I  think  enough  has  now  been  said  to  establish,  be¬ 
yond  all  reasonable  doubt,  our  second  proposition, 
that  if  Christianity  be  rejected,  there  is  no  other  re¬ 
ligion  which  can  be  substituted  in  its  place,  or  at 
least,  no  other  which  can  at  all  answer  the  purpose 
for  which  religion  is  desirable. 

It  may  also  be  observed,  in  conclusion,  that  the 
facts  which  have  been  adduced,  not  only  serve  to 
confirm  this  proposition,  but  furnish  new  and  cogent 
arguments  in  proof  of  the  proposition  maintained  in 
the  preceding  chapter. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

REVELATION  NECESSARY  TO  TEACH  US  HOW  TO  WORSHIP  GOD  ACCEPTABLY 

- THE  NATURE  AND  CERTAINTY  OF  A  FUTURE  STATE,  AND  ESPECIALLY 

THE  METHOD  BY  WHICH  SINNERS  MAY  OBTAIN  SALVATION. 

.  •  »  ,  « 

It  would  be  superfluous  here  to  repeat  what  was 
said  in  the  preceding  chapter,  respecting  the  need  in 
which  man  stood  of  a  revelation  when  he  first  pro¬ 
ceeded  from  the  hands  of  his  Creator.  The  object 
which  we  have,  at  present,  in  view,  is,  to  inquire, 
whether  man,  in  the  condition  in  which  we  now  find 
him,  and  in  which  history  informs  us  he  has  existed 
for  ages,  does  not  stand  in  urgent  need  of  more  light 
than  he  possesses;  and  whether  there  are  not  some 
points  of  vital  importance,  concerning  which  he  must 
remain  in  the  dark,  unless  the  knowledge  of  the  truth 
is  communicated  to  him  by  a  revelation  from  God. 
Let  it  be  understood,  however,  in  what  sense  it  is 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


35 


asserted,  that  a  revelation  is  necessary.  Of  course, 
it  is  not  meant  that  there  is  any  natural  necessity  for 
such  an  event ;  nor  is  it  intended  that  God  is  obliged 
by  any  necessity  to  grant  a  revelation.  The  neces¬ 
sity  contended  for  relates  altogether  to  the  wants  of 
man.  It  is  found,  that  in  all  times  and  under  all 
circumstances,  he  needs  information,  which  he  cannot 
obtain  from  the  unassisted  exercise  of  his  own  rea¬ 
son;  or  at  least  not  so  satisfactorily,  as  from  divine 
revelation. 

For  even  if  it  were  possible  for  a  few  philosophers 
of  the  highest  order  of  intellect,  by  long  and  profound 
investigation,  to  discover  all  the  truths  absolutely 
necessary  to  be  known;  yet,  for  the  bulk  of  mankind, 
it  might  be  all  important  to  have  these  same  things 
made  known  by  divine  revelation,  because  the  great 
majority  of  our  race  have  neither  leisure  nor  ability 
for  such  tedious  and  difficult  researches.  But  the 
truth  as  made  known  by  history  is,  that  on  those 
very  points  on  which  it  is  most  needful  that  man 
should  be  instructed,  the  wise  men  of  this  world  have 
been  as  much  at  a  loss  as  the  vulgar.  They  reasoned 
much,  and  speculated  as  far  as  human  intellect  could 
go,  but  instead  of  clearly  ascertaining  truth,  they 
rested  at  last  in  mere  conjecture,  or  deviated  into 
gross  error. 

Again,  if  the  light  of  nature  were  sufficient  to  shed 
some  light  on  the  great  truths  needful  to  be  known 
by  man ;  yet  a  clear  well-attested  communication 
from  heaven,  might  be  of  the  greatest  utility,  by 
speaking  decisively  and  authoritatively,  in  regard  to 
matters  concerning  which  the  conclusions  of  reason 
are  feeble  and  uncertain.  To  affect  the  conscience 
and  influence  the  heart,  it  is  highly  important  that 
religious  truth  should  be  attended  with  certainty,  and 
should  be  felt  to  possess  the  sanction  of  divine  autho¬ 
rity.  What  men  discover  by  the  slow  deductions  of 
reason  is  found  to  operate  feebly  on  the  conscience, 
compared  with  the  persuasion  that  God  speaks  to 
us  immediately  by  divine  revelation.  In  reasoning 
about  the  most  important  truths  men  differ  exceed- 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


ingly  from  one  another :  and  this  very  circumstance 
spreads  doubt  and  uncertainty  over  all  their  specula¬ 
tions.  When  we  peruse  the  discourses  of  the  wisest 
of  the  heathen  sages,  and  observe  what  darkness 
surrounded  them,  we  cannot  but  feel  commisera¬ 
tion  for  the  imbecility* of  the  human  intellect;  and, 
indeed,  the  best  of  them  were  deeply  convinced  of 
the  insufficiency  of  their  own  reason  to  guide  them; 
and  sometimes  seemed  to  entertain  a  glimmering 
hope,  that  at  some  future  period,  and  in  some  un¬ 
known  way,  divine  instruction  might  be  communi¬ 
cated  to  the  erring  children  of  men. 

It  is  also  more  than  probable  that  the  clearest  and 
most  important  ideas,  which  the  heathen  philosophers 
entertained,  were  not  the  discoveries  of  their  own 
reason,  or  a  light  struck  out  from  an  observation  of 
the  works  of  nature,  but  rays  of  truth  derived  more 
remotely  or  more  directly  from  divine  revelation,  as 
has  been  remarked  in  another  part  of  this,  essay. 
The  heathen  sages  attributed  all  their  knowledge  to 
tradition. 

But  after  all,  it  is  an  undeniable  fact,  that  reason, 
aided  as  it  was  by  tradition,  left  men  to  grope  in  the 
dark,  and  to  fall  into  the  most  degrading  idolatry. — • 
Indeed,  though  reason  may  teach  that  there  is  a  God, 
and  that  he  ought  to  be  worshipped;  yet  of  what 
kind  his  worship  should  be  in  order  to  be  acceptable, 
she  never  has  made  known,  nor  is  it  within  the  reach 
of  her  ability.  All  the  rites  of  worship  invented  by 
man  are  altogether  unworthy  of  God:  and,  truly,  it 
is  in  the  nature  of  things  impossible,  that  men  should 
devise  a  form  of  acceptable  worship,  for  no  service 
of  this  kind  which  he  has  not  himself  appointed, 
can  be  pleasing  in  the  sight  of  God.  Now,  if  men 
have  lost  the  knowledge  of  the  original  institutions 
of  religion ;  or,  if  these  have  become  altogether  cor¬ 
rupt,  there  must  be  a  new  revelation,  before  man 
will  be  able  to  render  an  acceptable  service  to  his 
Creator.  There  is  good  reason  to  believe  that  many 
of  the  heathen  rites  of  worship  are  nothing  but  cor¬ 
ruptions  of  divine  institutions,  which  were  given  to 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  37 

men  by  an  early  revelation.  This  seems  especially 
to  be  the  fact,  in  relation  to  sacrifices,  which  consti¬ 
tuted  an  essential  part  of  the  worship  of  almost  all 
ancient  nations,  and  some  vestiges  of  which  have 
come  do  wn  by  tradition  among  the  most  barbarous 
tribes.  Reason  certainly  never  taught,  men  that 
shedding  the  blood  and  taking  away  the  life  of  an 
animal, could  be  an  acceptable  sacrifice  to  the  Deity; 
or  that  presenting  it  on  an  altar,  and  consuming  it 
wholly  or  partially  by  fire,  could  be  a  propitiation 
for  sin;  and  yet  these  mysterious  ceremonies  were 
almost  as  universal  as  the  gift  of  speech.  And  be¬ 
tween  the  sacrifices  of  nations,  remote  from  each 
other,  there  has  been  remarked  a  wonderful  simi¬ 
larity  in  the  circumstances  of  their  sacred  offerings; 
in  the  erection  of  altars;  in  the  pouring  out  of  the 
blood;  in  dividing  the  animal  into  pieces;  in  com¬ 
bining  the  offering  Jof  salt,  wine,  bread,  and  incense, 
with  the  sacrifice  of  animals ;  in  considering  the 
blood  and  death  of  the  victim,  as  expiatory  for  sin; 
in  having  an  order  of  priesthood  to  officiate  in  these 
sacred  rites,  who  were  solemnly  consecrated  to  the 
service,  and  considered  more  holy  than  other  men; 
and  when  only  a  small  part  of  the  animal  sacrificed 
was  consumed  by  fire,  in  feasting  on  the  remainder, 
within  the  precincts  of  the  temple  or  sacred  enclo¬ 
sure.  This  analogy  may  be  traced  even  in  file¬ 
names,  by  which  similar  sacrifices  were  denominated 
among  different  nations.  These  and  many  other 
striking  resemblances  in  the  rites  of  ancient  nations, 
go  to  prove,  incontestably,  that  they  must  have  had 
a  common  origin;  and  no  account  of  this  is  half  so 
probable  as  that  which  ascribes  sacrificial  rites  to  an 
original  revelation.  And  hence  we  see  the  credibility 
of  the  Mosaic  history  in  regard  to  the*  origin  of  reli¬ 
gious  worship. 

But  supposing  that  any  heathen  nation  should  now 
be  convinced  of  the  absurdity  of  idolatry,  and  should 
become  sensible  of  their  obligations  to  render  some 
Kind  of  external  homage  to  the  great  Creator,  ty 

4 


38 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


what  means  could  they  learn  what  sort  of  service 
would  be  acceptable?  Reason  could  not  teach  them 
what  rites  should  be  observed.  Without  a  revelation 
from  God,  they  must  for  ever  remain  without  a  form 
of  worship;  or  if  they  attempted  to  invent  certain 
rites,  all  experience  teaches  that  these  human  inven¬ 
tions  will  ever  be  marked  by  human  weakness,  and 
reason  herself  intimates,  that  no  worship,  not  ap¬ 
pointed  by  God,  can  be  acceptable  to  him.  It  appears 
then,  that  even  if  man  were  not  a  sinner,  he  would 
need  a  divine  revelation  to  teach  him  how  to  render 
an  acceptable  worship  to  his  Creator. 

Some  infidel  writers  have  pretended  that  it  is  a 
matter  of  indifference  by  what  rites  God  is  worship¬ 
ped,  and  that  he  is  equally  pleased  with  the  services 
of  all  nations,  however  different  from  each  other  in 
their  mode  of  worship.  This  doctrine  is  utterly  in¬ 
consistent  with  the  dictates  of  sound  reason.  Upon 
this  principle  even  human  sacrifices,  which  have 
been  so  common  in  the  world,  would  be  justified. 
And  the  most  impure  and  abominable  rites  would 
be  sanctioned  by  the  Deity.  The  whole  worship  of 
Pagan  nations,  both  in  ancient  and  modern  times, 
is  detestable  ;  and  no  one  who  has  any  just  concep¬ 
tions  of  the  attributes  of  God,  can  persuade  himself 
that  he  ever  could  be  pleased  with  services  so  cha¬ 
racterized  by  cruelty,  impurity,  and  folly.  Their 
worship  is  not  directed  to  the  true  God,  but  to  the 
false  deities  of  their  own  invention.  They  sacrifice 
not  to  God  but  to  devils.  They  have  substituted  for 
the  august  Creator,  creatures  of  almost  every  kind 
and  species.  No  man  under  the  government  of  rea¬ 
son  can  look  into  any  heathen  temple  without  being 
shocked  and  confounded,  with  the  degrading  and 
abominable  rites  of  idolatry.  The  more  this  subject 
is  contemplated  the  more  clearly  will  the  necessity 
of  divine  revelation  be  felt,  and  the  greater  will  ap¬ 
pear  to  be  its  value  to  the  human  race.  Who  can 
read  an  account  of  the  mythology  and  idolatry  of  the 
ancient  Egyptians,  or  of  the  modern  Hindoos,  and 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


39 


not.  be  deeply  impressed  with  the  necessity  of  some¬ 
thing  to  dispel  this  horrible  darkness,  and  break 
asunder  these  cruel  bonds  of  superstition  ? 

Another  argument  for  the  necessity  of  a  divine 
revelation  is,  that  without  it  man  must  remain  igno¬ 
rant  of  his  origin  and  his  end,  and  utterly  unable  to 
account  for  the  circumstances  by  which  he  is  sur¬ 
rounded.  He  finds  himself  here  upon  the  earth,  and 
feels  that  he  is  borne  along  the  stream  of  time  with 
the  rest  of  his  generation,  towards  a  dark  gulf  be¬ 
fore  him,  which  he  perceives  he  can  by  no  means 
escape.  But  when  he  inquires  respecting  the  origin 
of  the  human  race,  when  he  seeks. a  solution  of  the 
enigma  of  his  sinful,  suffering,  and  mortal  existence, 
he  finds  no  one  among  the  living  or  the  dead,  from 
whom  he  can  obtain  the  least  satisfactory  informa¬ 
tion.  All  the  traditions  and  histories  of  men  are  full 
of  fables;  and  if  they  contain  some  rays  of  truth, 
they  are  so  mingled  with  error  that  no  man  can  dis¬ 
tinguish  the  one  from  the  other.  Leave  out  of  view 
the  history  contained  in  the  Bible,  and  all  that  we 
can  learn  from  others  casts  not  a  solitary  ray  of  light 
on  the  points  under  consideration.  We  have  no 
means  of  tracing  up  our  race  to  its  origin,  and  the 
deist  can  give  no  rational  account  of  the  wickedness 
of  men  and  of  their  sufferings  and  death.  The  dark¬ 
ness  and  uncertainty  resting  on  these  subjects  have 
led  many  who  rejected  the  authority  of  the  Bible,  to 
adopt  most  absurd  and  atheistical  hypotheses  respect¬ 
ing  the  origin  of  man.  Some  have  professed  to  be¬ 
lieve  that  the  earth  and  its  inhabitants  have  existed 
from  all  eternity;  which  is  too  absurd  to  require  re¬ 
futation.  Others  have  amused  themselves  and  their 
readers  with  the  idea,  that  originally  mankind  were 
merely  a  species  of  monkey  or  baboon,  and  that  by 
degrees  they  laid  aside  their  brutal  appearance  and 
manners,  and  certain  inhuman  appendages,  and 
having  in  process  of  time  in  vented  language  and  the 
arts  most  necessary  to  provide  for  the  clothing  and 
shelter  of  the  body,  gradually  rose  higher  and  higher 
in  the  scale  of  improvement,  until  they  arrived  at 


40 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


that  pitch  of  refinement  and  civilization,  which  has 
been  attained  by  the  most  polished  nations.  These, 
it  is  true,  are  rather  atheistical  than  deistical  hy¬ 
potheses  ;  but  they  serve  to  show  how  little  light 
reason  can  shed  on  this  subject,  and  how  much  we 
need  a  divine  revelation.  For  the  deist  can  form  no 
theory  which  can  satisfy  our  reasonable  desires. 
He  can  give  no  good  reason  for  the  moral  condition 
and  mortality  of  our  race.  lie  may  say,  that  it  is 
the  law  of  nature ;  but  this  is  merely  to  declare  the 
fact,  not  to  account  for  it. 

But  we  might,  perhaps,  be  contented  to  remain 
ignorant  of  our  origin,  if  we  could  know  what  is  to 
be  our  destiny  hereafter,  and  how  far  it  is  connected 
with  our  present  character  and  conduct.  Reason 
has  exerted  and  exhausted  all  her  resources  to  de¬ 
monstrate  a  future  existence,  and  to  place  the  im¬ 
mortality  of  the  soul  on  an  immovable  basis.  But 
what  has  been  tlje  result  of  all  these  reasonings? 
Why,  a  possibility,  or,  to  say  the  most,  a  strong  pro¬ 
bability,  that  the  soul  survives  the  body.  But  this, 
of  all  others,  is  the  point,  on  which  we  want  certain¬ 
ty — absolute  certainty.  How  painful  to  be  involved 
in  a  cloud  of  doubt  and  suspense,  when  we  look  for¬ 
ward  to  futurity;  and,  especially,  when  descending 
into  the  grave,  to  have  nothing  to  lay  hold  of  but  the 
conclusions  and  conjectures  of  our  own  feeble  rea¬ 
son  !  That  I  do  not  depreciate  the  force  of  the  argu¬ 
ments  for  the  soul’s  immortality,  will  appear  from 
the  fact,  that  many  of  the  heathen  philosophers  held 
that  the  soul  died  with  the  body ;  that  of  those  who 
believed  in  a  future  existence,  some  were  of  opinion, 
that  after  the  lapse  of  a  thousand  years  or  some 
longer  period,  it  would  come  to  an  end ;  others — 
and  these  very  numerous — believed  in  the  doctrine 
of  metempsychosis,  or  the  transmigration  of  souls 
from  the  body  of  one  animal  to  that  of  another,  in 
perpetual  succession;  and  more  still  had  no  other 
idea  of  immortality,  than  that  the  soul — which  they 
thought  was  a  particle  of  deity — would  at  death  be 
refunded  into  the  divine  essence ;  which  was  virtu- 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


41 


ally  to  deny  its  future  existence,  as  to  its  distinct  per¬ 
sonality,  or  as  possessing  individuality  and  conscious¬ 
ness.  Even  such  men  as  Socrates,  Plato,  and  Cice¬ 
ro,  had  no  clear,  consistent,  and  satisfactory  views 
of  this  interesting  subject ;  not  because  they  neglect¬ 
ed  to  exercise  their  cultivated  and  powerful  intellects 
upon  it ;  for  it  was  a  subject,  which  more  than  all 
others  engaged  their  thoughts  ; — -but  because  it  was 
surrounded  by  a  darkness  which  unassisted  reason 
could  not  penetrate.  0  how  glad  would  these  sages 
have  been  to  possess  one  ray  of  that  revelation 
which  our  infidels  foolishly  despise  !  The  earlier 
deists  generally  admitted  the  doctrine  of  a  future 
state  of  retribution,  and  affected  to  believe  that  rea¬ 
son  was  sufficient  to  establish  the  doctrine ;  but  their 
successors  in  modern  times,  or  at  least  a  large  ma¬ 
jority  of  them,  have  either  denied  or  called  in  ques¬ 
tion  this  fundamental  doctrine.  And  if  we  should 
weigh  impartially  all  the  arguments  which  have 
ever  been  adduced  in  ancient  or  modern  times  to 
establish  this  point,  we  should  be  obliged  to  confess 
that  we  need  further  light.  And  from  the  very  na¬ 
ture  of  the  case,  no  one  can  give  us  an  absolute 
assurance  of  our  future  and  immortal  existence,  but 
God  alone.  It  is  an  event  which  depends  on  his 
will  and  nothing  else.  Arguments  may  be  adduced 
to  prove  that  the  soul  is  naturally  immortal ;  but 
they  prove  no  more  than  this,  that  the  causes  which 
effect  the  dissolution  of  the  body,  can  have  no  ten¬ 
dency  to  destroy  the  existence  and  activity  of  the 
soul.  And  what  are  called  the  moral  arguments 
only  go  to  prove  that  if  God  exercises  a  moral  go¬ 
vernment  over  his  creatures  here,  there  must  be  a 
place  for  a  just  retribution  hereafter.  But  we  want, 
on  this  point,  more  certainty.  We  want  one  to 
come  from  the  other  world  to  tell  us  that  there  is  a 
future  state.  We  want  to  hear  the  voice  of  God 
testifying  that  there  is  not  only  a  future  state,  but  a 
day  of  righteous  judgment.  Here  every  man  can 
judge  for  himself,  whether  he  needs  a  revelation. 

This  argument  for  the  necessity  of  a  divine  reve¬ 
al 

4 


42 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


lation,  will  be  corroborated  by  observing  the  state 
of  religion  and  morals  among  all  heathen  nations. 
It  has  often  been  remarked,  that  the  most  certain 
method  of  ascertaining  what  reason  is  capable  of  ac¬ 
complishing  is  to  see  what  she  has  actually  done  in 
time  past,  especially,  when  enjoying  all  the  advan¬ 
tages  of  high  culture  and  extensive  information.  In 
physical  science  we  may  expect  new  discoveries  by 
the  exercise  of  reason;  and  the  science  of  morals 
may  in  time  to  come  be  better  understood ;  but  if  all 
nations,  the  most  civilized  and  learned  as  well  as  the 
rude  and  barbarous,  have  utterly  failed  in  forming 
correct  opinions  on  the  most  essential  points  of  theo¬ 
logy  and  ethics,  and  have  all  fallen  into  the  most 
absurd  and  degrading  errors,  and  acquiesced  in  the 
most  abominable  and  impure  rites  of  idolatry;  then, 
what  can  be  more  evident,  than  that  they  needed  a 
divine  revelation?  Probably  one  reason  why  the 
nations  were  left  so  long  to  walk  in  their  own  ways, 
was,  to  convince  us  of  our  own  imbecility,  and  to 
prepare  us  to  receive  gratefully  when  offered,  this 
most  comprehensive  gift  of  God. 

To  do  justice  to  this  argument  would  require 
volumes;  but  as  the  subject  has  been  amply  treated 
by  Leland,  and  others,  I  will  pass  it  over,  only  re¬ 
marking,  that  the  abominable  rites  of  Pagan  wor¬ 
ship,  and  the  shocking  cruelties  and  impurities  which 
have  ever  been  perpetrated  under  the  sanction  of 
every  heathen  religion,  make  but  a  faint  impression 
on  our  minds,  because  we  only  hear  the  distant  re¬ 
port  of  these  things,  and  are  often  tempted  to  think 
that  the  narrative  of  .these  horrible  doings  must  be 
too  highly  coloured ;  but  the  half,  and  far  more  than 
the  half,  remains  untold,  and  cannot  be  publicly  told, 
without  outrageously  offending  against  decency.  It 
is  an  awful  thought,  that  for  so  long  a  time  so  many 
millions  of  our  fellow  creatures  have  been  under  the 
cruel  bondage  of  superstition,  a  slavery  which  affects 
the  mind,  and  is  productive  of  more  human  misery 
than  all  other  causes.  As  Paganism  still  exists,  and 
as  its  evils  are  unmitigated  by  the  lapse  of  time,  it  is 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  43 

an  easy  matter  to  compare  the  Christian  with  the 
heathen  world.  Cast  your  eye  over  the  map  of  the 
earth,  and  say,  where  is  found  the  densest  darkness  ? 
Where  does  the  light  of  truth  shine  ?  Is  not  the 
line  of  demarkation  between  light  and  darkness 
visible  ?  And  is  it  not  as  evident  as  any  thing  can 
be,  that  the  Bible  is  a  rich  blessing  to  all  who  possess 
and  read  it?  We  might  here  also  institute  a  com¬ 
parison  between  those  Christian  nations  which  free¬ 
ly  circulate  the  Scriptures,  and  those  who  lock  them 
up  in  a  dead  language;  but  this  we  omit,  and  go  on 
to  remark,  that  he  who  is  informed  of  the  events 
which  have  occurred  on  missionary  ground,  in  our 
own  times,  must  have  his  eyes  covered  with  thick 
scales  of  prejudice,  if  he  does  not  acknowledge 
that  the  gospel  is  the  richest  benefit  which  can  be 
conferred  on  Pagan  nations.  Either  then,  a  vile 
imposture,  a  cunningly  devised  fable,  has  the  power 
of  reforming  and  civilizing  the  most  degraded  of  the 
heathen  tribes;  or  Christianity  is  a  Divine  Revela¬ 
tion,  and  is  still  accompanied  by  the  power  of  God, 
making  it  effectual  to  the  illumination,  conversion, 
and  salvation  of  the  Gentiles.  Let  the  deist  take  his 
choice  between  these  two  things.  But  here  let  me 
ask,  whether  if  a  company  of  deists  had  gone  out 
to  Africa  or  to  the  Society  or  Sandwich  Islands, 
any  such  reformation  would  have  been  wrought? 
The  reader  will  smile  at  the  idea  of  a  deist  turning 
missionary  to  the  heathen;  but  this  very  feeling 
demonstrates  that  deism  is  not  to  be  the  means  of 
regenerating  the  world.  If  the  deist  were  right  he 
would  be  the  only  proper  person  to  send  on  a  mis¬ 
sion  to  convert  the  idolatrous  world.  But  all  are 
ready  to  pronounce  the  very  idea  to  be  ludicrous. 
What !  a  missionary  society  of  deists  !  Why,  they 
have  no  confidence  in  their  own  principles,  in  this 
respect,  and  no  zeal  for  propagating  them  in  such  a 
field,  and  with  such  sacrifices  as  the  Christian  wil¬ 
lingly  makes. 

But  why  should  I  go  to  distant  and  heathen  lands, 
to  prove  that  a  revelation  is  necessary,  when  we 


44 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


% 


Have  proof  enough  before  our  eyes?  In  any  of  our 
populous  cities  we  may  draw  a  visible  line  between 
that  part  of  the  population  who  are  under  the  light 
of  evangelical  truth,  and  those  who  place  themselves 
out  of  the  reach  of  all  the  direct  rays  of  the  gospel. 
Between  these  two  extremes  there  is  a  large  class 
not  properly  reckoned  with  either;  but  let  us,  with¬ 
out  caring  for  exact  accuracy  in  our  computation, 
suppose,  that  one-third  of  the  adult  population  are 
regular  church-going  people,  who  hear  the  .  leading 
truths  of  the  gospel  from  Sabbath  to  Sabbath;  and 
that  another  third  seldom  or  never  attend  any  place 
of  public  worship.  Between  these  two  classes  of 
citizens  we  can  institute  a  comparison.  Exceptions 
you  may  have  to  make  on  both  sides,  but  taking 
them  in  mass,  is  there  any  room  to  doubt  whether 
religion  is  useful  and  necessary?  From  which  of 
these  classes  are  our  prisons  crowded  with  inmates? 
Suppose,  first,  that  all  those  who  never  read  the  Bi¬ 
ble,  and  frequent  no  place  of  worship,  were  removed 
from  among  us,  would  the  state  of  society  be  melio¬ 
rated  or  deteriorated?  Or  again,  suppose  that  all  the 
church-going  people  should  be  translated  to  another 
country,  what  would  then  be  the  condition  of  society? 
If  I  am  not  egregious!  y  erroneous  in  my  calculations, 
on  the  former  supposition  we .  should  be  able  to  dis¬ 
pense  with  most  of  our  means  of  coercion  and  re¬ 
straint,  and  would  save  the  enormous  expense  of 
keeping  up  such  an  array  of  courts,  police-officers, 
and  prisons.  On  the  latter  supposition,  all  the  wealth 
of  the  country  would  be  insufficient  to  provide  places 
of  confinement  and  means  of  support  for  the  guilty; 
or,  to  come  nearer  to  the  truth,  our  large  towns 
would  soon  become  as  Sodom,  or  as  a  den  of  thieves, 
and  soon  the  doom  of  Sodom  would  sink  them  never 
to  rise  again. 

But  does  any  one  think  that  this  is  not  a  fair  state¬ 
ment  of  the  matter,  as  it  seems  to  take  for  granted 
that  there  is  no  religion,  nor  can  be  any,  without 
revelation?  I  would  request  the  person  who  makes 
this  objection,  to  tell  me  what  kind  of  religion  might 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


45 


be  expected  if  the  Bible  were  banished  from  among 
us?  Suppose  that  instead  of  the  hundreds  of  gospel 
preachers,  whose  voices  are  lifted  up  on  the  first  day 
of  every  week,  to  warn  men  of  the  danger  of  a  sinful 
course,  and  to  point  out  to  them  the  way  of  life,  all 
these  pulpits  should  be  filled  with  infidel  lecturers, 
male  and  female;  what,  in  your  consciences,  do  you 
think  would  be  the  effect  on  morals  and  social  hap 
piness?  We  all  know  that  many  sinners  have  been 
converted  by  the  faithful  preaching  of  the  gospel;  do 
you  know,  or  have  you  heard  of  any  transgressors 
being  turned  from  the  error  of  their  ways  by  attend¬ 
ing  on  deistical  lectures,  or  even  on  the  theatre,  that 
boasted  school  of  morality?  No  doubt,  some  of  my 
readers  have  heard  of  conversions  at  these  places  of 
fashionable  resort,  but  not  to  righteousness,  not  to 
God.  And  as  I  have  happened  to  mention  the  thea¬ 
tre,  I  will  further  add,  that  I  am  far  more  afraid  of 
the  moral  influence  of  this  institution,  than  of  that  of 
deistical  and  atheistical  lectures ;  not  because  it  pleads 
for  vice — this  would  not  be  tolerated — but  because 
it  draws  thousands  within  the  enchanted  circle  of 
temptation,  and  plunges  thoughtless  youth  into  the 
vortex  of  sensual  pleasures 

I  admit  that  there  may  be  much  religion  without 
revelation ;  the  whole  heathen  world  is  a  proof  of  it. 
Some  men  of  the  world,  indeed,  confound  all  reli¬ 
gions  and  all  the  ministers  of  religion  together,  as  if 
they  were  all  alike ;  whereas,  true  and  false  religion 
are  as  dissimilar  as  light  and  darkness;  and  the  only 
effectual  harrier  to  false  religion,  is  to  cultivate  that 
which  is  true.  Infidelity  may  serve  to  sweep  away 
one  form  of  superstition,  but  after  a  time  the  tide  will 
turn,  and  enthusiasm  or  superstition  will  come  in  like 
a  flood;  for,  as  we  have  shown,  the  people  must  have 
some  sort  of  religion,  and  if  you  banish  that  which 
is  true,  rational,  sober,  and  benevolent,  you  will  soon 
be  visited  with  the  most  absurd  and  degrading  sys¬ 
tems  of  wild  fanaticism;  and  these  will,  when  the 
fires  of  enthusiasm  are  extinguished,  settle  down,  or 
rather  grow  up,  into  hideous  forms  of  superstition. 


46 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


The  pagan  religions  had  some  mixture  of  truth  de¬ 
rived  from  early  tradition;  for  they  were  all,  as  we 
have  seen,  a  corruption  of.  the  primitive  worship  ot 
fallen  man.  But  banish  the  Bible,  and  you  will 
have  in  its  place  either  the  dark  horrors  of  atheism, 
accompanied  with  crime,  in  her  polluted  and  blood¬ 
stained  robe,  or  you  will  have  the  reign  of  super¬ 
stition,  chilling  every  generous  emotion,  degrading 
every  noble  affection,  and  blighting  all  domestic  bliss. 

Sometimes,  a  splendid  temple  rests  upon  a  few 
solid  pillars,  and  falls  to.  ruin  if  they  be  removed. 
Thus  the  peace,  and  order,  and  comfort  of  civil  so¬ 
ciety  depend  much  on  two  institutions,  for  both  of 
which  we  are  indebted  to  revelation.  The  first  of 
these  is  the  sacre’d  institution  of  marriage  :  the 
second  is,  the  religious  obligation  of  an  oath  or 
solemn  affirmation,  which  is  virtually  the  same  thing. 
Remove  these,  and  the  fabric  of  human  happiness 
totters  at  once  to  its  very  base. 

But  the  argument  on  which  I  chiefly  mean  to 
dwell,  to  evince  the  necessity  of  a  revelation,  is,  that 
without  it  we  can  never  learn  how  sin  can  be  for¬ 
given  or  the  sinner  saved.  Admitting  that  reason 
can  direct  us  with  sufficient  clearness  in  regard  to  all 
our  moral  duties;  admitting  that  if  a  man  performs  his 
duty,  no  more  is  required  of  him,  and  he  may  con¬ 
fide  in  the  justice  and  goodness  of  God ;  admitting 
that  from  this  course  no  evil  will  ensue,  and  the  suit¬ 
able  reward  will  not  be  wanting;  admitting  all  this 
for  argument’s  sake — yea,  more,  that  all  men  pos¬ 
sess  this  knowledge:  yet,  I  maintain,  that  in  relation 
to  the  state  in  which  man  actually  is,  it  amounts  to 
nothing.  It  is  one  thing  to  have  a  system  of  religion 
which  suits  the  case  of  an  innocent  being,  and  quite 
another  to  find  out  a  plan  by  which  a  sinner  can 
obtain  forgiveness.  A  citizen  may  know  full  well 
that  if  he  obeys  the  laws  of  his  country  he  will  be 
protected  by  all  upright  magistrates;  but  if  he  has 
already  violated  the  laws  and  incurred  a  formidable 
penalty,  the  knowledge  mentioned  does  not  reach 
his  case.  What  he  needs  now  is,  to  know  how  he 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  47 

can  obtain  a  pardon,  and  evade  the  vengeance  of  the 
violated  law.  In  every  such  case,  there  is  an  abso¬ 
lute  need  of  a  declaration  or  revelation  from  the  su¬ 
preme  power  of  the  state,  of  a  willingness  to  pardon, 
on  some  certain  condition.  In  no  government  can 
a  pardon  be  a  matter  of  course,  or  provided  for  by 
the  law  itself;  for  such  a  provision  would  be  sub¬ 
versive  of  all  government.  It  would  be  a  complete 
nullification  of  the  obligation  and  authority  of  the 
law.  Here  then  the  momentous  question  occurs,  is 
man  a  sinner?  Have  all  men  transgressed  the  law 
of  God  ?  I  am  willing  to  wave  the  proof  of  this 
point,  for  the  present,  and  to  leave  it  to  the  decision 
of  every  man’s  conscience.  Is  there  a  man  upon 
earth  who  is  not  conscious  of  having  violated  the 
law  of  his  nature,  both  by  omissions  of  duty  and  the 
actual  commission  of  sin? 

Assuming  it  then  as  a  fact,  that  men  are  sinners,  I 
ask,  what  does  the  light  of  nature  teach  respecting 
the  forgiveness  of  sin?  I  shall  endeavour  to  demon¬ 
strate,  that  reason  sheds  not  a  ray  of  light  on  this 
fundamental  point,  and,  therefore,  that  Natural  Re¬ 
ligion,  if  known  ever  so  perfectly  and  universally, 
could  not  bring  us  the  relief  which  we  need.  The 
main  argument  for  the  position  which  I  have  laid 
down,  is  short  and  simple.  It  is  the  dictate  of  right 
reason,  that  God  is  just,  and  will  render  to  every 
one  according  to  his  character  and  conduct;  and  that 
his  law  being  wise  and  good  must  not  be  violated 
with  impunity.  Can  the  deist  conceive  of  an  objec¬ 
tion  to  this  principle?  Certainly  not.  It  must  be 
considered  a  self-evident,  truth  by  every  theist  who 
believes  in  the  moral  government  of  God.  The  case 
is  plain,  therefore,  and  so  far  as  the  dictates  of  reason 
extend,  the  sinner  has  no  prospect  before  him  but  to 
suffer  the  just  punishment  of  his  offences,  whatever 
that  may  be. 

To  suppose  that  reason  can  inform  us  that  God 
will  pardon  our  sins,  is  to  suppose  that  its  dictates 
are  contradictory ;  for,  to  pardon  is  the  same  as  not 
to  punish ;  but  as  we  have  just  seen,  the  voice  of 


48 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY1. 


reason  is,  that  God  is  just,  and  will  render  to  every 
man  what  he  deserves.  These  two  things  are  not 
compatible.  Before  I  proceed  further,  I  must  put 
the  reader  on  his  guard  against  loose  and  illogical 
reasoning  on  a  point  so  vital.  I  scarcely  know  a 
subject  on  which  most  men  appear  to  satisfy  them 
selves  with  more  vague  and  fallacious  arguments. 
Some  of  the  more  common  of  these  it  will  be  my 
object  now  to  consider. 

In  the  first,  place,  it  is  alleged,  and  with  much  con¬ 
fidence  asserted  by  many,  that  God  is  a  Being  of  too 
much  benevolence  and  kindness  to  inflict  severe  pun¬ 
ishments  on  his  erring  creatures.  This  suggestion, 
for  it  has  not  the  shape  of  an  argument,  seems  to 
give  honour  to  God,  while  it  is  very  soothing  to  the 
mind  of  the  sinner.  But  when  it  is  examined,  it  will 
be  found  to  be  rather  an  insult  than  an  honour  ;  for 
it  supposes  that  the  Ruler  of  the  universe,  out  of 
kindness  to  a  rebellious  creature,  will  cease  to  be 
just;  that  rather  than  punish  offences  as  they  deserve, 
he  will  dishonour  his  own  law.  What  sort  of  com¬ 
pliment  would  it  be  to  an  upright  judge  among  men, 
to  say  of  him,  that  his  benevolence  and  compassion 
would  surely  prevent  his  inflicting  the  penalties  an¬ 
nexed  to  the  laws?  But  if  the  Judge  of  all  the  earth 
does  not  act  upon  the  principle  of  punishing  all  sin 
as  it  deserves,  on  what  other  principle  does  he  act  ? 
By  punishing  it  half  as  much  as  it  deserves?  But 
this  might  be  a  severe  suffering,  and  therefore  the 
conclusion  to  which  this  reasoning  must  lead,  is,  that 
God’s  goodness  will  altogether  and  for  ever  prevent 
him  from  inflicting  any  punishment  on  sin,  however 
atrocious  it  may  be.  \/ 

Many  in  our  days,  who  are  not  called  deists  or 
atheists,  but  who  are  more  dangerous  because  they 
mingle  some  Christian  truth  with  their  errors,  greed¬ 
ily  embrace  and  zealously  inculcate  this  very  opin¬ 
ion.  But  look  at  its  consequences.  The  infinitely 
perfect  God  will  treat  alike  the  most  malignant  rebel 
and  the  most  affectionate  and  obedient  servant.  He 
will,  in  his  treatment  of  his  creatures,  manifest  no 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


49 


more  displeasure  at  sin,  than  he  does  towards  the 
most  perfect  virtue.  If  such  benevolence  as  this  ex¬ 
isted,  it  would  be  no  moral  perfection,  but  a  defect. 
But  no ;  God’s  attributes  are  never  at  variance. 
There  is  no  goodness  in  God  which  forbids  or 
prevents  the  fullest  exercise  of  justice.  If  ever  he 
chooses  to  rescue  sinners  from  the  consequences  of 
their  sins,  it  will  not  be  by  sacrificing  his  justice,  but 
by  fully  satisfying  it.  But  this  is  an  affair  of  which 
mere  reason  knows  nothing.  If  the  deist,  however, 
should  insist  that  all  moral  goodness  consists  in  bene¬ 
volence,  and  nothing  else,  and  therefore  God  will  not 
punish  any  but  for  his  own  good,  I  answer  that  the 
good  of  the  whole  is  to  be  preferred  by  a  benevolent 
being  to  the  happiness  of  an  offending  individual; 
and  in  all  communities,  the  general  good  requires 
that  transgressors  should  be  intimidated  and  restrain¬ 
ed  by  punishment;  so  that  it  must  be  proved  that 
the  good  of  the  universe  does  not  require  the  pun¬ 
ishment  of  the  guilty,  before  any  such  conclusion  can 
be  drawn  from  the  benevolence  of  God. 

It  is  manifest,  therefore,  that  the  suggestion  which 
we  have  been  considering,  however  pleasing  to  the 
mind  in  love  with  sin,  and  however  plausible  at  first 
sight,  will  not  bear  examination,  and  instead  of  tend¬ 
ing  to  the  honour  of  God,  takes  from  him  all  that  is 
estimable  in  moral  character.  It  allows  him  no  other 
excellence  than  an  indiscriminate  benevolence  to  his 
creatures,  without  the  least  regard  to  their  moral 
character.  Such  a  being  would  not  be  an  object  of 
veneration  and  esteem  to  all  holy  intelligences.  An 
infinitely  good  God  may  punish  transgressors  accord¬ 
ing  to  the  demerit  of  their  crimes,  without  any  dis¬ 
paragement  of  his  goodness;  and  an  infinitely  just 
and  holy  God  must  punish  sin.  “  Shall  not  the  Judge 
of  all  the  earth  do  right?” 

Another  suggestion,  supposed  by  many  to  be  a 
dictate  of  reason,  is,  that  all  the  punishments  ever 
inflicted  on  men  for  their  sin  is  the  evil  which  arises 
out  of  it  from  the  laws  of  nature,  and  the  constitution 
of  the  human  mind;  and  that  there  is  no  good  ground 

5 


50 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


for  any  apprehension  of  any  further  or  greater  pen¬ 
alty.  There  is  no  proof  adduced  of  the  truth  of  this 
position,  nor  does  it  admit  of  proof.  Who  can  tell 
what  the  judge  of  all  may  think  it  necessary  to  inflict 
hereafter  on  sinners,  for  the  manifestation  of  his 
justice,  the  vindication  of  his  law,  and  as  a  terror  to 
other  offenders?  Indeed,  as  far  as  we  can  judge  of 
the  facts,  men  do  not  suffer  in  this  life,  in  any  just 
proportion  to  their  crimes.  The  wicked  are  often 
prosperous;  and  when  the  conscience  becomes  cal¬ 
lous,  they  experience  but  little  remorse  for  their  worst 
crimes.  Transgressors  who  are  only  beginning  their 
career,  experience  the  agonies  of  an  accusing  con¬ 
science  in  the  keenest  manner;  while  the  veteran  in 
iniquity  has  long  since  ceased  to  be  much  troubled 
with  these  “  compunctious  visitings.”  But,  suppo¬ 
sing  it  true,  that  all  the  punishment  of  sin  is  that 
which  naturally  follows  it,  who  can  tqll  what  all  the 
consequences  are,  or  where  they  will  end?  Crimes 
do  not  always  produce  their  bitterest  fruit  immedi¬ 
ately.  We  see  the  sins  of  the  intemperate,  the  lewd, 
and  the  dishonest,  often  overtaking  them  with  their 
saddest  consequences,  long  after  the  acts  were  com¬ 
mitted.  Sins  committed  in  youth  often  produce  a 
miserable  old  age.  Look  into  the  history  of  multi¬ 
tudes  whose  vices  have  consigned  them  to  a  prison 
or  a  mad  house,  and  you  will  find  that  the  cause  of 
their  wretchedness  and  disgrace  may  be  traced  back 
to  the  sins  of  their  youth,  those  very  sins  which  many 
are  disposed  to  regard  with  so  indulgent  an  eye. 
And  as' these  evils  go  on  increasing  until  death,  who 
can  assure  the  sinner  that  this  fearful  progression 
will  not  continue  beyond  the  grave  ?  As  we  are  not 
now  arguing  with  atheists,  we  have  a  right  to  assume 
as  a  truth  the  souPs  future  existence;  and  if  it  exists 
in  conscious  activity,  will  it  not  carry  with  it  the 
moral  character  acquired  in  this  world?  Will  not  the 
selfish,  the  proud,  the  malignant,  be  selfish,  proud, 
and  malignant,  when  the  clay  tabernacle  is  dropped? 
Can  death  transform  a  sordid  and  guilty  creature  into 
an  angel?  Will  not  the  man  who  is  wicked  up  to 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


51 


the  moment  of  dissolution,  continue  to  be  wicked 
after  death?  Will  not  he  carry  with  him  his  memo¬ 
ry,  his  conscience,  and  his  craving  desires?  There 
is  then  but  little  comfort  for  the  sinner  in  this  sugges¬ 
tion,  if  true;  for  he  may  find  springing  out  of  his  own 
corruption  a  worm  which  will  never  die,  and  which 
will  gnaw  his  vitals  with  as  agonizing  a  pain  as  any 
which  he  is  capable  of  Enduring.  Be  it  so,  that 
conscience  is  the  only  fire  to  be  dreaded  in  another 
world — who  can  tell  us  how-intense  and  intermina¬ 
ble  the  pain  which  this  principle  of  our  nature  is  ca¬ 
pable  of  inflicting  on  the  sinner?  The  fear,  remorse, 
and  horrible  perturbation  which  sometimes  surround 
the  death-bed  of 'profligate  sinners,  afford  a  tremen¬ 
dous  intimation  of  what  they  may  expect  in  a  future 
state.  How  great  or  how  long  the  evil  consequences 
of  sin  may  be,  our  reason  certainly  cannot  tell ;  as 
far  as  her  dictates  extend,  we  can  see  no  end  to  this 
progression  in  vice  and  misery. 

But  I  now  come  to  the  consideration  of  a  much 
more  specious  opinion,  on  which  deists,  and  others 
who  agree  with  them  in  these  matters,  place  great 
confidence.  It  is,  that  whatever  the  deserved  pen¬ 
alty  of  sin  may  be,  reason"  teaches  us  that  it  can  be 
set  aside,  or  evaded,  by  a  sincere  and  seasonable 
repentance.  This  principle  has  been  assumed  as  a 
fundamental  article  in  all  the  systems  of  sober  deists. 
It  is  well  known  that  Lord  Herbert  laid  it  down  as 
one  of  the  five  positions  on  which  he  founded  his 
system;  and,  therefore,  as  perfectly  understood  by 
all  men.  And  as  many  who  wish  to  be  considered 
rational  Christians  adopt  the  same  principle,  it  has 
gained  very  general  possession  of  the  public  mind. 
And  again,  as  pardon  and  repentance  are  closely 
connected,  according  to  the  doctrines  of  the  Gos¬ 
pel,  this  truth  of  revelation  is  by  many  not  distin¬ 
guished  from  what  is  considered  a  dictate  of  reason; 
and  hence  it  becomes  a  matter  of  real  difficulty  to 
separate  truth  from  error  on  this  point;  and  in  at¬ 
tempting  it,  we  must  encounter  a  formidable  front 
of  prejudice.  Before  I  proceed  further,  I  must  re- 


52 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


quest  the  reader  to  separate  the  evangelical  doctrine 
of  pardon,  on  repentance,  from  the  deistical  principle 
under  consideration;  for  they  stand  on  entirely  dif¬ 
ferent  grounds,  as  will  appear  in  the  -course  of  the 
discussion. 

And  here  let  it  be  carefully  remarked,  that  before 
this  doctrine  of  reason,  as  it  is  called,  can  become  a 
practical  principle,  two  things  must  be  pre-supposed ; 
first,  that  all  men  know  what  that  repentance  is 
which  will  insure  our  pardon;  and  next,  that  every 
sinner  has  ability  to  perform  it.  The  reasonableness 
of  these  pre-requisites  is  self-evident.  But  great 
difficulty  attends  the  theory,  as  it  relates  to  these 
points.  We  would  ask  whether  by  that  repentance 
which  reason  inculcates,  any  thing  more  is  meant 
than  sorrow  or  compunction  for  our  sins ;  or  whether 
it  includes  a  thorough  reformation  of  life,  and  that 
not  merely  extending  to  external  acts,  but  to  the 
motives  and  affections  of  the  heart.  It  is  also  rea¬ 
sonable  to  ask,  whether  any  certain  degree  or  con¬ 
tinuance  of  sorrow  is  requisite ;  and  whether  re¬ 
pentance  will  not  cease  to  be  available,  if  the  sinner 
revert  to  his  former  ways  of  iniquity.  Moreover, 
whether  repentance,  flowing  simply  from  fear  of 
punishment,  is  genuine;  and  if  not,  what  sort  of 
principles  it  must  have  as  its  source.  It  is  also 
needful  and  important  to  inquire,  whether  an  invet¬ 
erate,  hardened  sinner  can  repent  of  his  sins,  so  as 
to  hate  and  forsake  them ;  and  surely  no  other  re¬ 
pentance  is  worth  any  thing.  With  a  mind  filled 
Avith  error,  his  conscience  seared,"  and  his  habits 
deeply  radicated,  what  hope  is  there  of  his  turning 
about  and  commencing  a  new  life  ?  From  Avhat 
principle  could  Ave  anticipate  such  a  change  in  a 
confirmed  villain  or  debauchee  ?  You  might  as  rea¬ 
sonably  expect  the  Ethiopian  to  change  his  skin,  as 
that  he  Avho  has  been  long  accustomed  to  do  evil 
should  learn  to  do  Avell.  It  will  answer  no  purpose 
to  say,  that  he  can  repent  if  he  will,  and  if  he  will 
not,  the  blame  is  all  his  oavu;  for  we  are  inquir¬ 
ing  whether  reason  can  teach  a  method  of  salva- 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 


53 


Cion  adapted  to  the  condition  of  sinners,  and  it  mat¬ 
ters  not  whether  the  obstacle  be  in  the  will  or  in 
something  else :  if  it  uniformly  prevents  the  desired 
effect,  it  is  plain,  that  something  else  is  needed.  As 
to  the  blame  being  on  his  own  head,  it  is  admitted ; 
but  this  is  true  in  regard  to  every  sin.  In  every  act 
of  transgression  the  sinner  is  culpable,  otherwise  it 
would  be  no  sin ;  and  if  the  only  object  be  to  fix  the 
blame  upon  the  culprit,  this  is  sufficiently  provided 
for  without  offering  him  pardon  upon  repentance ; 
for  life  and  happiness  can  be  secured  without  repent¬ 
ance,  if  men  will  only  obey  the  law  of  God  perfectly. 
And  there  is  no*  greater,  nor  other  inability  in  the 
way  of  his  doing  this,  than  in  the  way  of  his  exer¬ 
cising  true  penitence.  There  is  manifestly  a  radical 
defect  in  the  deistical  theory  on  this  very  point.  It 
makes  no  provision  for  bringing  the  sinner  to  repent¬ 
ance,  but  merely  offers  pardon  in  case  he  will  do  that 
to  which  his  whole  heart  is  averse.  And  does  not 
fact  accord  with  our  sentiments?  Where  are  the 
instances  of  deists  repenting  of  their  sins,  and  yet 
adhering  to  this  system  ?  There  are  indeed  many 
glorious  examples  of  infidels  being  brought  to  re¬ 
pentance  and  reformation  by  the  Gospel;  but  I  would 
challenge  the  world  to  produce  an  instance  of  any 
one  being  brought  vo  repentance,  and  a  thorough 
change  of  life,  merely  on  the  principles  of  deism. 
And  if  the  principle  is  in  practice  utterly  ineffectual, 
of  what  value  is  it  ?  and  why  should  it  be  magnified 
into  a  matter  of  so  much  importance  as  to  be  ad¬ 
duced  as  a  proof  that  a  revelation  is  not  needed  ? 

As,  however,  I  wish  to  give  a  full  and  impartial 
discussion  to  this  poind  I  will  now,  for  the  sake  of 
argument,  suppose,  that  the  repentance  which  is  ne¬ 
cessary  to  pardon  is  understood  by  all  men,  and  that 
all  have  ability  to  perform  it.  The  opinion  then,  is, 
that  all  sinners  by  repentance  may  escape  the  punish¬ 
ment  justly  due  to  their  sins;  and  this  repentance 
they  can  bring  into  exercise  at  any  time  when  it  may 
be  needed.  If  this  be  true,  and  a  dictate  of  reason, 
then  it  must  be  confessed  that  a  revelation  is  not  ab- 


54 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


solutely  necessary;  for  what  method  of  salvation  can 
be  simpler,  easier,  or  more  intelligible  than  this?  But 
I  deny  that  any  such  doctrine  belongs  to  the  system 
of  Natural  Religion,  or  is  dictated  by  the  light  of 
reason.  This  opinion  of  the  efficacy  of  repentance 
is  borrowed  from  the  Gospel,  and  has  been  tacked 
to  deism,  with  which  it  has  no  coherence.  It  is  alto¬ 
gether  incompatible  with  the  first  great  fundamental 
principle  of  natural  religion ;  namely,  that  God  being 
just  will  render  to  every  one  according  to  his  moral 
character  and  conduct.  Deists  have  ever  been  in  the 
habit  of  borrowing  from  revelation,  without  giving 
credit  for  what  they  take,  and  perhaps,  without 
knowing  whence  the  sentiment  is  derived.  Men, 
born  and  educated  under  the  light  of  revelation, 
however  they  may  come  to  reject  the  Bible  and  all 
the  positive  institutions  of  Christianity,  cannot  divest 
themselves  of  all  those  important  moral  principles 
which  directly  or  indirectly  they  have  derived  from 
this  source.  The  light  of  divine  revelation  is  widely 
diffused  in  Christian  countries,  and  has  given  com¬ 
plexion  to  all  our  laws,  institutions,  and  systems  of 
education ;  so  that  a  man  can  no  more  escape  entirely 
from  its  influence  than  from  the  effect  of  the  light  of 
the  sun.  Many  truths  which  the  deist  pretends  to 
have  discovered  by  the  light  ef  reason,  are  nothing 
else  than  the  reflected  light  of  divine  revelation;  for 
how  else  can  you  account  for  it,  that  the  theories  and 
moral  systems  of  our  sober  deists  should  be  so  much 
superior  to  the  attainments  of  Socrates,  Plato  and 
Cicero  ?  Their  conduct  resembles  that  of  a  man  who 
should  light  his  taper  by  means  of  the  sun’s  rays, 
and  then  pretend  that  all  the  light  around  him  lie 
had  struck  out  himself,  or  that  it  was  produced  by 
the  feeble  taper  which  he  held  in  his  hand. 

But  to  return  to  the  point  under  discussion.  If  a 
man,  now  that  he  is  a  sinner,  can  certainly  know 
that  the  punishment  of  his  sins  may  be  evaded  by  a 
repentance  completely  in  his  own  power,  he  could 
also  know  this  before  he  sinned.  Then,  with  the 
law  written  on  his  heart,  and  sanctioned  with  a  pen- 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


55 


alty,  he  had  the  clear  knowledge  from  reason,  that 
commit  whatever  atrocious  sins  he  might,  and  incur 
whatever  punishment  he  might,  he  would  at  any 
and  at  every  moment  of  his  existence,  have  it  in  his 
power  to  escape  all  the  punishment  which  he  had 
merited,  simply  by  the  act  of  repentance.  This  is  a 
plain  and  fair  statement  of  the  case,  and  it  is  easy  to 
see  that  it  is  completely  subversive  of  the  law  of  God 
as  a  binding  rule,  and  leaves  it  fully  in  the  power  of 
the  creature  to  do  whatever  he  pleases.  He  may 
deliberately  determine  that  he  will  rebel  against  his 
Maker,  till  the  last  moment  of  life,  and  then  disarm 
his  vengeance  by  repentance.  The  penalty  of  the 
law  may  be  in  itself  tremendous,  but  it  can  deter  no 
one  from  any  course  which  he  may  be  inclined  to 
pursue,  because  he  can  at  any  moment  remove  him¬ 
self  from  its  operation.  What  greater  license  could 
the  most  daring  rebel  wish  than  what  is  thus  granted  ? 
This  single  principle  admitted  into  the  moral  govern¬ 
ment  of  God  would  be  a  complete  nullification  of  the 
divine  authority. 

These  consequences  of  the  doctrine  under  consid¬ 
eration  are  evident  and  inevitable,  and  demonstrate 
that  it  cannot  be  a  principle  of  reason  or  natural  reli¬ 
gion.  But  it  may  be  thought  by  some,  that  the  same 
objection  will  lie  with  all  its  force  against  the  doc¬ 
trine  of  the  gospel,  which  promises  a  plenary  pardon 
to  every  true  penitent.  But  the  evangelical  doctrine 
of  repentance  stands  on  entirely  different  grounds. 
That  such  an  offer  would  be  made,  could  be  known 
by  no  creature  before  he  sinned.  This  doctrine  does 
not  in  the  least  clash  with  the  justice  of  God;  for  all 
the  sins  of  the  penitent,  to  which  pardon  is  granted, 
are  virtually  and  actually  punished  in  the  sinner’s 
substitute.  Here  is  the  grand  point  of  difference 
between  Christianity  and  all.  other  systems.  The 
former  maintains  the  glory  and  harmony  of  all  the 
divine  attributes;  the  latter  obscure  or  would  destroy 
one  attribute,  to  make  way  for  another.  The  con¬ 
sequence  is,  that  the  way  in  which  pardon  is  granted 
to  the  penitent,  according  to  the  gospel,  has  no  ten- 


56  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

dency  to  relax  our  obligation  to  obedience,  or  to 
lessen  our  sense  of  the  evil  of  sin;  but  the  deistical 
principle  of  forgiveness,  as  we  have  seen,  nullifies 
the  law  and  authority  of  the  Governor  of  the  uni¬ 
verse,  and  leaves  it  completely  at  the  option  of  the 
creature,  whether  he  will  obey  or  transgress  the  law 
of  God.  The  former  is  perfectly  consistent  with  the 
justice  of  God,  extending  pardon  to  no  sin  for  which 
satisfaction  has  not  been  made ;  while  the  latter  is  in 
direct  repugnance  to  the  clearest  demands  of  justice. 

Another  objection  to  the  opinion  that  the  punish¬ 
ment  of  sin  is  remitted  upon  repentance  is,  that  this 
is  contrary  to  experience  and  fact.  We  have  seen 
that  the  deist  is  fond  of  considering  the  punishment 
of  sin  as  being  nothing  else  but  its  consequences, 
arising  out  of  the  laws  of  nature*  Is  it  true,  then, 
that  the  laws  of  nature  change  their  course  as  soon 
as  a  sinner  repents?  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  the  penitent 
thief  in  the  jail,  and  the  repentant  debauchee  in  the 
hospital,  are  still  suffering  the  consequences  of  their 
crimes  long  since  committed?  Repentance  cannot 
bring  back  lost  health,  ruined  reputation,  dissipated 
fortune,  and  alienated  friends.  How  then  can  the 
deist,  on  his  own  principles,  pretend  that  the  punish¬ 
ment  of  sin  is  removed  by  repentance?  He  may 
allege  that  the  future  punishment  of  sin  will  be  re¬ 
mitted;  but  how  does  he  know  this?  Reason  can 
judge  nothing  in  regard  to  the  future,  but  by  some 
analogy  with  what  is  observed  to  take  place  in  this 
life;  and  all  analogy  is  against  the  opinion,  that  the 
evil  consequences  of  sin  will  be  terminated  by  death. 

Again,  if  pardon  be  granted  only  to  the  penitent, 
and  the  impenitent  be  punished  according  to  the  de¬ 
merit  of  their  crimes,  then  there  is  a  state  of  sinning 
which  renders  it  proper  that  sin  should  be  punished 
rigidly,  according  to  its  desert.  There  can,  therefore, 
be  no  argument  drawn  from  the  goodness  and  com¬ 
passion  of  God  against  the  condign  punishment  of 
sinners.  But  why  is  impenitence  alone  to  be  con¬ 
sidered  as  exposing  a  sinner  to  the  wrath  of  God  ? 
And  why  are  the  penitent  alone  exempt  from  the 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


57 


penalty  of  the  law?  The  answer  must  be,  either 
that  the  sin  of  impenitence  is  so  great  as  to  deserve 
this  severe  treatment,  or  the  merit  of  repentance  is 
such  as  to  atone  for  the  greatest  sins.  But  supposing 
that  impenitence  draws  after  it  deeper  guilt  than  all 
other  sins,  that  does  not  prove  that  this  alone  should 
be  punished ;  it  only  proves  that  it  should  be  punish¬ 
ed  more.  If  there  be  a  plain  principle  in  jurispru¬ 
dence,  it  is,  that  every  sin  should  certainly  be  visited 
with  punishment,  but  exactly  according  to  its  nature. 
There  is  no  reason  why  a  less  sin  should  be  suffered 
to  pass  rather  tffitn  a  greater.  Strict  justice  says,  let 
every  sin  have  its  due  retribution.  The  greatness  of 
the  sin  of  impenitence,  therefore,  cannot  be  a  reason 
why  the  impenitent  alone  are  to  be  punished.  Nor 
can  this  great  difference  in  the  treatment  of  sinners 
be  owing  to  the  merit  of  repentance ;  for  it  would  be 
difficult  to  tell  wherein  its  extraordinary  merit  con¬ 
sists.  It  must  either  be  in  the  obedience  or  the  suf¬ 
fering  involved  in  the  exercise  of  repentance.  But 
it  cannot  consist  in  the  degree  of  obedience  which  it 
contains ;  for  if  this  were  perfect,  it  could  do  no  more 
than  answer  the  demands  of  the  moral  law  for  the 
time  being,  but  could  have  no  effect  on  sins  already 
committed.  I  think  it  a  self-evident  truth,  that  my 
obedience  this  moment  cannot  atone  or  satisfy  for 
my  disobedience  the  preceding  moment ;  for  I  do  no 
more  than  my  duty.  Then  certainly  the  obedience 
included  in  repentance  cannot  atone  for  all  past  sins, 
however  enormous,  for  it  is  imperfect,  and  moreover 
has  nothing  in  it  which  enhances  its  value  above 
other  acts  of  obedience.  Neither  can  the  suffering 
involved  in  repentance  atone  for  past  sins;  for  these 
pangs  of  compunction  owe  all  their  virtue  to  the 
obedience  with  which  they  are  connected,  and  with¬ 
out  which  they  would  not  even  be  of  a  moral  nature. 
Unless  some  one  should  be  of  opinion,  that  these 
penitential  sorrows  are  to  be  considered  as  an  equi¬ 
valent  for  the  penalty  of  the  law :  but  this  cannot  be 
correct,  because  an  equivalent  for  the  penalty  of  tho 
law  would  be  an  equal  degree  and  duration  of  suffer- 


58 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


ing.  If  indeed  a  person  of  higher  dignity  and  greater 
worth  is  permitted  to  suffer  in  the  place  of  another, 
in  proportion  to  the  difference  in  dignity,  the  suffer¬ 
ings  may  he  diminished.  It  is,  however,  always  a 
matter  in  the  breast  of  the  Supreme  Judge,  whether 
to  allow  of  such  a  substitution.  I  see  nothing  un¬ 
reasonable  in  it.  But  in  the  case  under  inquiry,  the 
same  person  who  owes  the  suffering,  if  I  may  so 
speak,  endures  the  sorrows  of  repentance ;  and  how, 
I  would  ask,  can  the  pious  grief  of  a  few  hours  or 
days  he  an  equivalent  for  the  punishment  of  the  most 
heinous  transgressions?  Besides,  the  penitent  sinner 
ever  feels,  and  is  ready  to  confess,  that  he  deserves 
other  punishment.  No  one  who  ever  truly  repented, 
entertained  the  idea  that  by  this  he  had  made  a  com¬ 
plete  atonement  for  his  sins.  These  stains  are  of  too 
deep  a  dye  to  be  washed  out  by  a  few  penitential 
tears.  Nothing  can  be  more  opposed  to  this  opinion 
than  the  views  and  feelings  involved  in  the  exercises 
of  true  repentance.  Every  true  penitent  is  deeply 
convinced,  that  he  deserves  heavier  punishment  than 
is  involved  in  the  sorrows  which  he  now  experiences. 

There  is,  however,  one  ground-  for  the  opinion, 
that  there  is  a  reasonable  connexion  between  repent¬ 
ance  and  forgiveness,  perhaps  more  plausible  than 
any  other  argument ;  it  therefore  merits  a  distinct 
consideration.  It  is,  that  all  good  men  acknowledge 
that  it  is  a  virtue  to  forgive  those  who  offend  us, 
when  they  appear  to  be  penitent ;  and  Christians 
cannot  deny  that  this  is  a  part  of  moral  duty,  for  it 
is  repeatedly  and  emphatically  enjoined  in  the  New 
Testament,  as  a  thing  essential.  What  is  here  alleged 
we  fully  admit,  and  are  Avilling  to  go  further  and  say, 
that  it  is  made  the  duty  of  Christians  to  forgive  those 
who  injure  them,  whether  they  repent  or  not;  for 
they  are  required  to  “  love  their  enemies,  to  do  good 
to  them  that  hate  them,  to  bless  them  that  curse, 
them,  and  pray  for  them  which  despitefully  use 
them.”  But  this  is  entirely  a  distinct  case,  and 
resting  on  principles  entirely  different  from  the  one 
under  consideration.  It  is  no  part  of  the  duty  of 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  59 

Christians  to  inflict  condign  punishment  on  those 
who  sin,  even  if  they  have  been  injured  by  them. 
They  are  forbidden  to  seek  revenge,  or  to  render  to 
the  wicked  according  to  their  iniquities ;  not  because 
there  is  any  thing  improper  or  inconsistent  Avith  mo¬ 
ral  goodness  in  punishing  the  guilty  as  they  deserve ; 
but  because  this  is  the  peculiar  prerogative  of  the 
Governor  of  the  universe.  In  those  very  passages 
of  Scripture  where  vengeance  is  forbidden  to  the 
creature,  in  express  and  emphatical  language  it  is 
claimed  for  the  Almighty.  “  Vengeance  is  mine,  I 
will  repay,  saith  the  Lord;  therefore,  if  thine  enemy 
hunger,  feed  him,  if  he  thirst,  give  him  drink,  for  in 
so  doing  thou  shalt  heap  coals  of  fire  on  his  head.” 
If  this  duty  of  forgiveness  in  the  Christian  proved 
any  thing,  it  Avould  prove  more  than  is  wished;  it 
would  follow,  that  God  would  certainly  pardon  not 
only  the  penitent,  but  all  sinners,  however  obstinate 
in  their  rebellion.  But  this  conclusion  is  altogether 
at  variance  with  the  opinion  which  we  have  had 
under  discussion,  and  is  not  even  held  by  the  deist. 

Another  argument  in  favour  of  the  doctrine  that 
repentance  is  naturally  connected  with  pardon,  is 
derived  from  the  practice  of  granting  pardon  in  hu¬ 
man  governments.  But  here  there  is  a  mistake  res¬ 
pecting  the  real  state  of  the  fact ;  for  although  it  is 
true  that  in  all  human  governments,  it  is  found  expe¬ 
dient  to  have  a  pardoning  power  lodged  somewhere, 
yet  no  government  ever  yet  professed  to  act  on  the 
principle  of  pardoning  all  offences  on  the  condition 
of  repentance ;  nor  indeed  is  the  extension  of  mercy 
to  certain  criminals,  who  have  incurred  the  penalty 
of  the  laAV,  at  all  connected  with  this  principle.  The 
reason  why  it  is  sometimes  right  to  pardon  offences 
against  the  state,  is  either  because,  in  some  particu¬ 
lar  case,  the  rigid  execution  of  law  would  not  be 
entirely  just ;  or,  because  on  account  of  the  number 
of  persons  implicated,  sound  policy  may  dictate  that 
only  the  most  guilty  should  be  held  up  as  an  exam¬ 
ple.  It  appears,  then,  that  the  weakness  of  human 
governments  is  the  ground  on  which  the  penalty  of 


60 


EVIDENCES  0E  CHRISTIANITY. 


the  law  is  remitted ;  but  no  such  reason  can  exist  in 
the  divine  government.  In  the  execution  of  human 
laws,  no  inquiry  is  ever  instituted  whether  the  crim¬ 
inal  be  penitent ;  nay,  though  his  repentance  should 
be  most  evident,  this  never  disarms  the  law  of  its 
penalty.  The  penitent  thief  or  murderer  is  punished 
by  our  laws,  as  well  as  the  obstinate  and  impenitent. 
If  in  a  few  cases  rulers  who  possessed  the  power  of 
granting  pardon  have  acted  on  the  principle,  that 
criminals  who  discovered  signs  of  penitence'  should 
be  on  that  account  pardoned,  it  only  proves,  that 
men  entrusted  with  power  may  be  misled;  for  un¬ 
doubtedly  this  principle  carried  out  would  soon  be 
subversive  of  all  law.  If  the  only  end  of  punish¬ 
ment  were  the  good  of  the  culprit,  then,  indeed,  such 
a  course  might  be  defended;  but  as  long  as  the  good 
of  the  community  is  the  chief  end  of  punishment,  it 
never  can  be  safe  to  offer  pardon  to  all  who  profess 
repentance,  or  who  for  a  time  appear  to  be  reformed. 

I  think  it  is  manifest  from  the  preceding  discussion, 
that  the  idea  of  a  certain  connexion  between  repent¬ 
ance  and  pardon  in  the  moral  government  of  God,  is 
not  derived  from  the  light  of  nature,  but  from  the 
gospel ;  and  therefore,  if  pardon  is  to  be  had  in  this 
way,  it  is  only  on  the  ground  of  the  atonement  of 
Christ,  and  not  on  account  of  any  merit  or  efficacy  in 
repentance  to  take  away  the  guilt  of  sin. 

If  these  views  are  correct,  then  is  a  divine  revela¬ 
tion  absolutely  necessary  to  teach  us  that  God  is  wil¬ 
ling  to  receive  the  penitent  into  favour,  and  to  show 
on  what  terms  this  is  practicable. 

Hence  we  may  learn  the  deplorable  situation  of 
our  whole  race,  and  the  infinite  obligations  which 
we  are  under  to  God  for  the  gospel.  All  our  well- 
grounded  hopes  of  pardon  and  salvation  we  owe  to 
the  free  mercy  of  God  in  Christ,  and  to  the  expiatory 
efficacy  of  the  great  atonement 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


61 


CHAPTER  V. 


THERE  IS  NOTHING  IMPROBABLE  OR  UNREASONABLE  IN  THE  IDEA  OF  A 
REVELATION  FROM  GOD,  AND  CONSEQUENTLY  NOTHING  IMPROBABLE  OR 
UNREASONABLE  IN  SUCH  A  MANIFEST  DIVINE  INTERPOSITION,  AS  MAY 
BE  NECESSARY  TO  ESTABLISH  A  REVELATION. 


That  a  revelation  is  possible,  will  not  be  called  in 
question  by  any  who  believe  in  the  existence  of  a 
God;  nor  can  it  be  believed  that  there  is  any  thing 
in  the  notion  of  a  revelation  repugnant  to  the  moral 
attributes  of  the  Supreme  Being.  It  cannot  be  in¬ 
consistent  with  the  wisdom,  goodness  or  holiness  of 
God,  to  increase  the  knowledge  of  his  intelligent 
creatures.  The  whole  end  of  a  revelation  is  to  make 
men  wiser,  better,  and  happier;  and  what  can  be 
conceived  more  accordant  with  our  ideas  of  divine 
perfection  than  this  ? 

That  man  is  capable  of  receiving  benefit  from  a 
revelation  is  a  truth  so  evident,  that  it  would  be 
folly  to  spend  time  in  demonstrating  it;  for  what¬ 
ever  may  be  thought  of  the  sufficiency  of  Natural 
Religion  if  it  were  fully  understood  and  improved, 
all  must  admit,  that  men,  generally,  have  not  been 
sufficiently  enlightened  on  the  subject  of  religion. 
The  history  of  the  world  in  all  ages  proves  the  de¬ 
plorable  ignorance  of  the  greater  part  of  the  human 
race,  even  on  those  subjects  which  the  advocates  of 
Natural  Religion  confess  to  be  most  important  and 
fundamental,  as  has  been  proved  in  the  preceding 
chapter. 

It  cannot  be  thought  an  unreasonable  supposition, 
that  when  God  made  the  original  progenitors  of  our 
race,  he  should  furnish  them  with  such  knowledge  as 
was  absolutely  necessary,  not  only  for  their  comfort 
but  for  their  preservation.  As  they  were  without 
experience,  and  had  none  upon  earth  from  whom 
they  could  derive  instruction,  is  it  unreasonable  to 

G 


G2  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

suppose,  that  the  beneficent  Creator  communicated 
to  them  such  a  stock  of  knowledge  as  was  requisite 
for  the  common  purposes  of  life  ?  The  theory  of 
those  who  suppose  that  man  was  at  first  a  dumb, 
irrational  animal,  very  little  different  from  those 
which  now  roam  the  forest,  that  from  this  state  he 
emerged  by  his  own  exertions,  that  he  invented 
articulate  speech  and  all  the  arts  of  life,  without  ever 
receiving  any  aid  or  any  revelation  from  his  Creator, 
has  already  been  sufficiently  refuted.' 

If  then  man  received  at  first  such  ideas  as  were 
necessary  to  his  condition,  this  was  a  revelation;  and 
if  afterwards  he  should  at  any  time  need  information 
on  any  subject  connected  with  his  happiness,  why 
might  not  the  benevolent  Creator,  who  does  not 
abandon  the  work  of  his  hands,  again  vouchsafe  to 
make  a  communication  to  him  ?  Such  an  exigency, 
deists  themselves  being  judges,  did  arise.  Men 
almost  universally  fell  into  the  practice  of  idolatry, 
and  lost  the  knowledge  of  the  true  God.  They  be¬ 
took  themselves  to  the  worship  of  the  luminaries 
of  heaven,  dead  men,  beasts,  and  inanimate  things. 
They  invented  superstitious  rites,  not  only  irrational, 
but  cruel  and  abominable.  These  were  transmit¬ 
ted  from  generation  to  generation;  and  the  children 
became  still  more  involved  in  ignorance  than  their 
parents.  That  the  righteous  Governor  of  the  uni¬ 
verse  may  leave  men  to  follow  their  o  wn  inventions, 
and  suffer  by  their  own  folly,  is  certain ;  for  he  has 
done  so.  But  is  it  not  consistent  with  his  wisdom 
and  goodness  to  use  extraordinary  means  to  rescue 
them  from  a  state  so  degraded  and  wretched  ?  Would 
not  every  sober  deist  admit,  that  some  means  of 
bringing  them  back  to  just  ideas  of  Natural  Religion 
would  be  desirable  ?  If  then  the  apostasy  of  man 
from  his  Maker  should  render  some  further  revela¬ 
tion  necessary,  would  it  not  be  highly  benevolent  to 
communicate  whatever  knowledge  his  circumstances 
required  ?  Why  should  it  be  thought  unreasonable, 
that  God  should  sometimes  depart  from  his  common 
mode  of  acting,  to  answer  great  and  valuable  ends  ? 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  63 

What,  is  there  in  the  established  course  of  nature  so 
sacred  or  so  immutable,  that  it  must  never  on  any 
occasion  or  for  any  purpose  be  changed  ?  The  only 
reason  why  the  laws  of  nature  are  uniform,  is,  that 
this  is  for  the  benefit  of  man,  but  if  his  interest  re¬ 
quires  a  departure  from  the  regular  course,  what  is 
there  to  render  it  unreasonable?  The  author  of  the 
universe  has  never  bound  himself  to  pursue  one  un¬ 
deviating  course,  in  the  government  of  the  world. 
The  time  may  come  when  he  may  think  proper  to 
change  the  whole  system.  As  he  gave  it  a  begin¬ 
ning,  he  may  also  give  it  an  end.  General  uniformi¬ 
ty  is  expedient,  that  men  may  know  what  to  expect, 
and  may  have  encouragement  to  use  means  to  obtain 
necessary  ends;  but  occasional  and  unfrequent  devia¬ 
tions  from  this  uniformity  have  no  tendency  to  pre¬ 
vent  the  benefit  arising  from  it.  This  is  so  evident 
a  truth  that  I  am  almost  ashamed  to  dwell  so  long 
upon  it;  but  by  the  sophistry  of  infidels  a  strange 
darkness  has  been  thrown  over  the  subject,  so  that  it 
seems  to  be  thought  that  there  would  be  something 
immoral,  or  unwise  and  inconsistent,  in  contravening 
the  laws  of  nature. 

Let  it  be  remembered  that  the  object  here  is  not 
to  prove  that  there  must  be  a  revelation;  it  is  only 
to  show  that  there  would  be  nothing  unreasonable 
in  the  thing;  and  further,  that  it  would  be  a  very 
desirable  thing  for  man,  and  altogether  consistent 
with  the  perfections  of  God,  and  the  principles  on 
which  he  governs  the  world. 

If  God  should  determine  to  reveal  his  will  to  man, 
how  could  this  be  most  conveniently  effected  ?  We 
can  conceive  of  two  ways.  The  first,  by  inspiring 
all  who  needed  knowledge  with  the  ideas  which  he 
wished  to  communicate ;  the  second,  by  inspiring  a 
few  persons,  and  directing  them  to  make  known  to 
others  the  truths  received.  The  first  would  seem 
to  be  the  most  effectual,  but  the  last  is  more  analo¬ 
gous  to  his  other  dispensations.  Reason  might  have 
been  given  in  perfection  at  once,  and  not  left  to  the 
uncertainty  of  education  and  human  improvement; 


64  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

but  such  is  not  the  fact.  By  slow  degrees  and  much 
culture  this  faculty  attains  its  maturity,  and  when 
.  neglected  never  acquires  any  high  degree  of  strength. 
In  regard  to  the  best  mode  of  making  a  revelation, 
however,  we  are  totally  incompetent  to  judge;  but 
of  one  thing  we  may  be  certain,  that  if  God  should 
give  a  revelation  to  men,  he  would  so  attest  it  as  to 
enable  all  sincere  inquirers  to  know  that  it  derives  its 
origin  from  him;  for  otherwise  it  would  be  useless, 
as  there  would  be  no  evidence  of  its  truth.  Sup¬ 
posing  a  revelation  to  be  given,  what  would  be  a 
satisfactory  attestation  of  its  divine  origin?  It  must 
be  some  sign  or  evidence  not  capable  of  being  coun¬ 
terfeited;  something  by  which  God  should  in  some 
way  manifest  himself.  And  how  could  this  be 
effected,  but  by  the  exertion  of  his  power  or  the 
manifestation  of  his  infinite  knowledge ;  that  is,  by 
miracles,  or  by  prophecies,  or  by  both  ?  There  is 
then  just  as  much  probability  that  miracles  will 
exist,  (for  prophecy  may  be  considered  one  kind  of 
miracle)  as  that  a  revelation  will  be  given.  The 
conjunction  of  these  two  things  is  reasonable;  if  we 
find  the  one,  we  may  be  sure  the  other  exists  also. 

It  is  admitted  that  a  revelation  from  God  would 
have  internal  evidence  of  its  origin,  but  this  does  not 
strike  the  attention  at  once.  It  requires  time  before 
it  can  be  perceived;  but  in  the  first  establishment  of 
a  revelation,  there  is  need  of  some  evidence  which  is 
obvious  to  the  senses  and  level  to  the  capacities  of 
all.  Just  such  an  evidence  are  miracles.  Moreover, 
internal  evidence  requires,  in  order  that  it  may  be 
perceived  and  appreciated,  a  certain  favourable  state 
of  the  moral  feelings,  without  which  it  is  apt  to  be 
overlooked,  and  produces  no  conviction ;  whereas, 
external  evidence  is  not  only  level  to  every  capacity, 
but  adapted  to  bring  home  conviction  to  every  des¬ 
cription  of  men,  to  the  bad  as  well  asvthe  good. 

Miracles,  then,  furnish  the  best  proof  for  the  estab¬ 
lishment  of  a  revelation;  they  seem  to  be  its  proper 
seal ;  they  are  the  manifest  attestation  of  God.  No¬ 
thing  can  be  conceived  which  will  more  strikingly 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


65 


indicate  his  power  and  presence,  than  a  visible  sus¬ 
pension  of  the  laws  of  nature.  He  is  invisible :  he 
must  make  himself  known  by  his  works,  and  a  mira¬ 
cle  is  such  a  work  as  no  other  can  perform.  When, 
therefore,  a  person  professes  to  have  received  a  reve¬ 
lation  from  God,  and  when  we  behold  the  effects  of 
Almighty  power  accompanying  his  words,  all  are 
sure  that  God  is  with  him,  and  that  he  is  a  teacher 
sent  from  God ;  for  otherwise  he  could  never  perform 
such  wonderful  works;  or  rather,  to  speak  more  cor¬ 
rectly,  God  would  never  exert  his  power  to  confirm 
the  pretensions  of  an  impostor,  or  to  attest  doctrines 
which  are  not  true. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

MIRACLES  ARE  CAPABLE  OF  PROOF  FROM  TESTIMONY. 

I  do  not  know  that  any  one  has  denied  that  a  mira¬ 
cle  would  be  credible  if  exhibited  to  our  senses.  A 
man  might,  indeed,  be  deceived  by  an  illusion  arising 
from  some  disorder  in  his  senses ;  but  if  he  were  con- 
scious  of  being  in  a  sound  state  of  body  and  mind, 
and  should  witness  not  only  one,  but  a  variety  of 
miracles;  not  only  a  few  times,  but  for  years  in  suc¬ 
cession;  and  if  he  should  find  that  all  around  him 
had  the  same  perceptions  of  these  facts  as  himself,  I 
need  not  say  that  it  would  be  reasonable  to  credit  his 
senses,  for  the  constitution  of  his  nature  would  leave 
him  no  choice:  he  would  be  under  the  necessity  of 
believing  what  he  saw  with  his  eyes,  heard  with  his 
ears,  and  handled  with  his  hands.  But  are  there 
facts  which  a  man  would  credit  on  the  evidence  of 
his  senses,  which  cannot  possibly  be  rendered  credi¬ 
ble  by  the  testimony  of  any  number  of  witnesses? 
Then  there  might  be  facts,  the  knowledge  of  which 
could  never  be  so  communicated  as  to  be  worthy  of 

6* 


66 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 


credit.  According  to  this  hypothesis,  the  constitution 
of  our  nature  would  require  us  to  withhold  our  assent 
from  what  was  true,  and  from  what  others  knew  to 
be  true.  If  a  thousand  persons  of  the  strictest  vera¬ 
city  should  testify  that  they  had  repeatedly  witnessed 
a  miracle,  and  if  all  circumstances  should  concur  to 
corroborate  their  testimony,  yet  upon  this  principle 
it  would  be  unreasonable  to  credit  them,  even  if  they 
should  consent  to  die  in  confirmation  of  what  they 
declared  to  be  the  fact.  This  is  the  ground  taken  by 
Mr.  Hume,  in  his  boasted  argument  against  miracles. 
But  it  appears  to  me  that  every  man,  even  before 
examination,  must  be  convinced  that  it  is  false ;  for 
it  is  contrary  to  common  sense  and  universal  experi¬ 
ence  of  the  effect  of  testimony.  The  true  principle 
on  this  subject  is,  that  any  fact  which  would  be  be¬ 
lieved  on  the  evidence  of  the  senses,  may  be  reason¬ 
ably  believed  on  sufficient  testimony.  There  may 
be  testimony  of  such  a  nature  as  to  produce  convic¬ 
tion  as  strong  as  any  other  conceivable  evidence ;  and 
such  testimony  in  favour  of  a  miracle  would  estab¬ 
lish  it  as  firmly  as  if  we  had  witnessed  it  ourselves. 
But  though  this  is  the  conclusion  of  common  sense 
and  experience,  the  metaphysical  argument  of  Mr. 
Hume  has  had  the  effect  of  perplexing  and  unsettling 
the  minds  of  many :  and  as  he  boasts  that  “  it  will  be 
useful  to  overthrow  miracles  as  long  as  the  world 
endures,”  it  seems  necessary  to  enter  into  an  exami¬ 
nation  of  his  argument,  that  we  may  be  able  to  ex¬ 
pose  its  fallacy.  This  has  already  been  done  in  a 
convincing  manner,  by  several  men,*  eminent  for 
their  learning  and  discrimination ;  and  if  their  works 
were  read  by  all  who  peruse  Hume,  I  should  think 
it  unnecessary  to  add  a  single  word  on  the  subject. 
But  it  may  not  be  without  its  use  to  present  a  refu¬ 
tation  in  a  condensed  form,  for  the  sake  of  those  who 
will  not  take  the  trouble  to  go  through  a  minute  and 
extended  demonstration. 

The  argument  of  Mr.  Ilume  will  be  best  exhibited 
in  his  own  words.  “  A  miracle,”  says  he,  “  support- 
*  Dr.  Campbell,  Prof.  Vince,  Mr.  Adam,  Dr.  Douglas. 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 


67 


ed  by  any  human  testimony,  is  more  properly  a  sub¬ 
ject  of  derision,  than  of  argument.  No  testimony  for 
any  kind  of  miracle  can  ever  possibly  amount  to  a 
probability.’7 — “  We  establish  it  as  a  maxim,  that  no 
human  testimony  can  have  such  force  as  to  prove  a 
miracle,  and  make  a  just  foundation  for  any  system 
of  religion.77 — “  Our  belief  or  assurance  of  any  fact 
from  the  report  of  eye  witnesses,  is  derived  from  no 
other  principle  than  experience ;  that  is,  our  observa¬ 
tion  of  the  veracity  of  human  testimony,  and  of  the 
usual  conformity  of  facts  to  the  reports  of  witnesses. 
Now,  if  the  fact  attested  partakes  of  the  marvellous, 
if  it  is  such  as  has  seldom  fallen  under  our  own 
observation;  here  is  a  contest  of  two  opposite  experi¬ 
ences,  of  which  the  one  destroys  the  other  as  far  as 
its  force  goes.  Further,  if  the  fact  affirmed  by  the 
witness,  instead  of  being  only  marvellous  is  really 
miraculous;  if,  besides,  the  testimony  considered 
apart,  and  in  itself,  amounts  to  an  entire  proof ;  in 
that  case  there  is  proof  against  proof,  of  which  the 
strongest  must  prevail.  A  miracle  is  a  violation  of 
the  laws  of  nature;  and  as  a  firm  and  unalterable  ex¬ 
perience  has  established  these  laws,  the  proof  against 
a  miracle,  from  the  very  nature  of  the  fact,  is  as  entire 
as  any  argument  from  experience  can  possibly  be 
imagined.  And  if  so,  it  is  an  undeniable  conse¬ 
quence,  that  it  cannot  be  surmounted  by  any  proof 
whatever  from  testimony.  A  miracle,  therefore, 
however  attested,  can  never  be  rendered  credible, 
even  in  the  lowest  degree.77 

Here  we  have  the  substance  of  Mr.  Hume’s  argu¬ 
ment,  on  which  I  propose  to  make  some  remarks, 
intended  to  show  that  its  whole  plausibility  depends 
on  the  assumption  of  false  principles,  and  the  artful 
use  of  equivocal  terms. 

1.  Some  prejudice  is  created  in  the  mind  of  the 
unsuspecting  reader,  by  the  definition  of  a  miracle 
here  given.  It  is  called  “  a  violation  of  the  laws  of 
nature,77  which  carries  with  it  an  unfavourable  idea, 
as  though  some  obligation  were  violated  and  some 
injury  done.  But  the  simple  truth  is,  that  the  laws 


68 


EVIDENCES  OE  CHRISTIANITY. 


of  nature  are  nothing  else  than  the  common  opera¬ 
tions  of  divine  power  in  the  government  of  the  world, 
which  depend  entirely  for  their  existence  and  contin¬ 
uance  on  the  divine  will ;  and  a  miracle  is  nothing 
else  than  the  exertion  of  the  same  power  in  a  way 
different  from  that  which  is  common;  or  it  may  be  a 
mere  suspension  of  that  power  which  is  commonly 
observed  to  operate  in  the  world. 

2.  Mr.  Hume’s  argument  will  apply  to  the  evi¬ 
dence  of  the  senses  as  well  as  to  that  derived  from 
testimony,  and  will  prove  (if  it  prove  any  thing)  that 
it  would  be  impossible  to  believe  in  a  miracle,  if  we 
should  witness  it  ever  so  often.  “  The  very  same 
principle  of  experience,”  says  he,  “  which  gives  us  a 
certain  degree  of  assurance  in  the  testimony  of  wit¬ 
nesses,  gives  us  also,  in  this  case,  another  degree  of 
assurance  against  the  fact  which  they  endeavour  to 
establish,  from  which  contradiction  there  arises  ne¬ 
cessarily  a  counterpoise,  and  mutual  destruction  of 
belief  and  authority.”  The  very  same  counterpoise 
and  mutual  destruction  of  belief  must  also  occur  be¬ 
tween  the  assurance  derived  from  the  senses  and  that 
derived  from  experience.  The  reason  why  testimony 
cannot  be  believed  in  favour  of  a  miracle,  is  not, 
according  to  Mr.  Hume,  because  it  has  no  force,  for 
taken  by  itself  it  may  be  sufficient  to  produce  assu¬ 
rance  ;  but  let  this  assurance  be  as  strong  as  it  may, 
it  cannot  be  stronger  than  that  derived  from  univer¬ 
sal  experience.  “  In  that  case,”  says  he,  “  there  is 
proof  against  proof.”  It  is  evident  that,  upon  these 
principles,  the  same  equilibrium  from  contradictory 
evidence  must  take  place  between  experience  and 
the  senses.  If  one  evidence  be  stronger  than  an¬ 
other,  “  the  stronger  must  prevail,  but  with  a  dimi¬ 
nution  of  force  in  proportion  to  that  of  its  antago¬ 
nist.”  But  in  the  case  of  the  senses  and  a  firm  and 
unalterable  experience,  the  evidence  is  perfect  on 
both  sides,  so  that  the  “  counterpoise  and  mutual 
destruction  of  belief”  must  occur.  According  to  this 
metaphysical  balance  of  Mr.  Hume,  a  miracle  could 
not  be  believed  if  we  witnessed  it  ever  so  often;  for 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


69 


though  there  is  a  great  weight  of  evidence  on  each 
side,  yet  as  there  is  an  equilibrium,  neither  can  have 
any  influence  on  our  assent.  Whether  Mr.  Hume 
would  have  objected  to  this  conclusion  does  not  ap¬ 
pear;  but  it  is  manifest,  that  it  logically  follows  from 
his  argument,  as  much  as  in  the  case  to  which  he 
has  applied  it.  And  here  we  see  to  what  a  pitch  of 
skepticism  his  reasoning  leads. 

3.  Mr.  Hume  makes  an  unnecessary  distinction 
between  that  which  is  marvellous  and  that  which  is 
miraculous;  for  though  there  is  a  real  difference, 
there  is  none  as  to  his  argument.  The  force  of  his 
reasoning  does  not  relate  to  events  as  being  miracu¬ 
lous ,  but  as  being  opposite  to  universal  experience. 
If  the  conclusion  therefore  be  correct,  it  will  equally 
prove,  that  no  testimony  is  sufficient  to  establish  a 
natural  event  which  has  not  before  been  experienced. 
If  ever  so  many  witnesses  should  aver  that  they  had 
seen  meteoric  stones  fall  from  the  clouds,  or  the  gal¬ 
vanic  fluid  melt  metals,  yet  if  we  have  never  experi¬ 
enced  these  things  ourselves  we  must  not  believe 
them. 

4.  The  opposite  or  contrary  experience  of  Mr. 
Hume  in  regard  to  miracles,  can  mean  nothing  more 
than  that  such  things  have  not  been  experienced. 
There  is  no  other  opposite  experience  conceivable  in 
this  case,  unless  a  number  of  persons  present  at  the 
same  time  should  experience  opposite  impressions. 
The  distinction  which  he  artfully  makes  in  relation 
to  “  the  king  of  Siam,  who  refused  to  believe  the 
first  reports  concerning  the  effects  of  frost,”  between 
that  which  is  contrary  to  experience  and  that  which 
is  not  conformable  to  experience,  is  without  founda¬ 
tion.  For  a  fact  cannot  be  contrary  to  experience 
in  any  other  way  than  by  being  not  conformable 
to  it.  There  neither  '  is  nor  can  be  any  experience 
against  miracles,  except  this,  that  they  have  not 
occurred  in  our  own  experience  or  that  of  others. 
When  the  proposition  of  our  author  is  expressed  in 
language  free  from  ambiguity,  it  will  amount  to  this, 
that  what  has  never  been  experienced  can  never  be 


70  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

believed  on  any  testimony;  than  which  nothing  can 
easily  be  conceived  more  false.  In  what  a  situation 
must  man  have  been  at  the  beginning  of  the  world, 
if  he  had  adopted  the  principles  of  this  skeptic  ! 

5.  Mr.  Hume  uses  the  word  experience  in  a  two¬ 
fold  sense,  changing  from  one  to  the  other  as  best 
suits  his  purpose.  Sometimes  it  means  personal 
experience,  and  at  other  times,  and  more  commonly, 
the  experience  of  the  whole  world.  Now  if  it  be 
taken  to  mean  our  own  individual  experience,  the 
argument  will  be  that  no  fact  which  we  ourselves 
have  not  witnessed  can  be  established  by  testimony; 
which,  if  correct,  would  cut  off  at  a  stroke  the  greater 
part  of  human  knowledge.  Much  the  most  numer¬ 
ous  class  of  facts  are  those  which  we  receive  upon 
testimony  of  others,  and  many  of  these  are  entirely 
different  from  any  thing  that  we  have  personally 
experienced.  Many  learned  men  never  take  the 
trouble  to  witness  the  most  curious  experiments  in 
philosophy  and  chemistry;  yet  they  are  as  well  satis¬ 
fied  of  their  truth  as  if  they  had  personal  experience 
of  it. 

But  though  an  argument  founded  on  an  opposi¬ 
tion  between  testimony  and  experience,  in  order  to 
be  of  any  validity,  must  relate  to  personal  expe¬ 
rience;  yet  Mr.  Hume  commonly  uses  the  term  to 
signify  the  experience  of  all  men  in  all  ages.  This 
extensive  meaning  of  the  term  must  be  the  one  which 
he  affixes  to  it  in  most  places  of  his  essay;  because 
it  is  experience  by  which  we  know  that  the  laws 
of  nature  are  uniform  and  unalterable ;  and  he  has 
given  an  example  which  clearly  determines  the  sense 
of  the  word.  “  That  a  dead  man  should  come  to 
life,”  says  he,  “  has  never  been  witnessed  in  any  age 
or  country.”  Now,  according  to  this  use  of  the  word, 
what  he  calls  an  argument  is  a  mere  assumption 
of  the  point  in  dispute,  what  logicians  call  a  petitio 
principii ,  a  begging  of  the  question.  For,  what  is 
the  question  in  debate  ?  Is  it  not  whether  miracles 
have  ever  been  experienced?  And  how  does  Mr. 
Hume  undertake  to  prove  that  they  never  did  exist  ? 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  71 

By  an  argument  intended  to  demonstrate  that  no 
testimony  can  establish  them;  the  main  principle  of 
which  argument  is  that  all  experience  is  against 
them.  If  miracles  have  ever  occurred,  they  are  not 
contrary  to  universal  experience ;  for  whatever  has 
been  witnessed  at  any  time,  by  any  person,  makes 
part  of  universal  experience.  What  sort  of  reasoning 
is  it  then  to  form  an  argument  against  the  truth  of 
miracles,  founded  on  the  assumption,  that  they  never 
existed?  If  it  be  true,  as  he  says,  that  it  has  never 
been  witnessed  in  any  age  or  country,  that  a  dead 
man  should  come  to  life,  then  indeed  it  is  useless  to 
adduce  testimony  to  prove  that  the  dead  have  on 
some  occasions  been  brought  to  life.  If  he  had  a 
right  to  take  this  for  granted,  where  was  the  use  of 
such  a  parade  of  reasoning  on  the  subject  of  testi¬ 
mony?  The  very  conclusion  to  which  he  wished  to 
come  is  here  assumed  as  the  main  principle  in  the 
argument.  It  is  however  as  easy  to  deny  as  to 
affirm;  and  we  do  utterly  deny  the  truth  of  this  posi¬ 
tion  ;  so  that  after  all  we  are  at  issue  precisely  on  the 
point  where  we  commenced.  Nothing  is  proved  by 
the  argument  which  promised  so  much,  except  the 
skill  of  the  writer  in  sophistical  reasoning. 

6.  Our  author  falls  into  another  mistake  in  his 
reasoning.  The  object  is  to  prove  that  testimony 
in  favour  of  miracles  can  never  produce  conviction, 
because  it  is  opposed  by  uniform  and  unalterable 
experience.  But  how  do  we  know  what  this  univer¬ 
sal  experience  is?  Is  it  not  by  testimony,  except 
within  the  narrow  circle  of  our  own  personal  experi¬ 
ence  ?  Then  it  turns  out  that  the  testimony  in  favour 
of  miracles  is  neutralized  or  overbalanced  by  other 
testimony.  That  is,  to  destroy  the  force  of  testimony 
he  assumes  a  principle  founded  on  testimony.  It  is 
admitted  that  when  testimony  is  adduced  to  establish 
any  facts,  if  other  and  stronger  testimony  can  be 
brought  against  them,  their  credibility  is  destroyed. 
But  if  I  bring  testimony  for  a  fact,  and  some  one 
alleges  that  he  can  show  that  this  testimony  is  un¬ 
worthy  of  credit  because  he  can  bring  witnesses  to 


72 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY 


prove  that  many  persons  in  different  countries  and 
ages  never  saw  any  such  thing ;  to  such  a  person  1 
would  reply,  that  even  if  these  witnesses  declared  the 
truth,  it  could  not  overthrow  the  positive  testimony 
which  I  had  adduced,  as  they  did  not  contradict  the 
facts  asserted;  and  besides,  it  must  be  determined 
which  witnesses  are  the  most  credible,  yours  or  mine. 
Just  so  it  is  in  the  case  of  Mr.  Hume’s  argument. 
He  sets  up  uniform  experience  against  testimony, 
and  gives  a  preponderance  to  the  former,  on  the 
ground  that  witnesses  are  known  sometimes  to  lie; 
but  all  that  he  knows  of  what  has  happened  in  other 
ages  and  countries,  is  by  testimony;  and  they  who 
give  this  testimony  sue  as  fallible  as  others;  there¬ 
fore,  there  existed  no  ground  for  preferring  the  evi¬ 
dence  of  experience  to  testimony.  Besides,  he  is  not 
in  possession  of  testimony  to  establish  a  thousandth 
part  of  what  has  been  experienced ;  and  as  far  as  it 
goes,  it  amounts  to  no  more  than  non-experience , 
a  mere  negative  thing  which  can  never  have  any 
■weight  to  overthrow  the  testimony  of  positive  wit¬ 
nesses.  In  a  court  of  justice,  such  a  method  of  rebut¬ 
ting  testimony  would  be  rejected  as  totally  inadmis¬ 
sible.  If  we  had  sufficient  evidence  of  a  fact  of  any 
kind,  that  testimony  would  not  be  invalidated,  if  it 
could  be  proved  that  no  person  in^the  world  had 
ever  witnessed  the  like  before.  This  want  of  pre¬ 
vious  experience  naturally  creates  a  presumption 
against  the  fact,  which  requires  some  force  of  evi¬ 
dence  to  overcome :  but  in  all  cases,  a  sufficient 
number  of  witnesses,  of  undoubted  intelligence  and 
veracity,  will  be  able  to  remove  the  presumption  and 
produce  conviction. 

7.  Mr.  Hume  lays  it  down  as  a  principle,  that  our 
belief  in  testimony  arises  from  “experience,  that  is, 
observation  of  the  veracity  of  human  testimony.”  But 
this  is  not  correct.  Our  belief  in  testimony  is  as  natural 
and  constitutional  as  our  belief  in  our  senses.  Chil¬ 
dren  at  first  believe  implicitly  all  that  is  told  them,  and 
it  is  from  experience  that  they  learn  to  distrust  testi¬ 
mony.  If  our  faith  in  testimony  arose  from  experi- 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 


73 


ence,  it  would  be  impossible  to  acquire  any  know¬ 
ledge  from  instruction.  If  children  were  to  believe  no¬ 
thing  that  was  told  them  until  they  had  made  obser¬ 
vations  on  the  veracity  of  human  testimony,  nothing 
would  be  believed;  for  they  would  never  arrive  at  the 
maturity  and  judgment  necessary  to  make  observa¬ 
tions  on  a  subject  so  complicated. 

But  although  Mr.  Hume’s  object  in  wishing  to 
establish  this  false  principle  was,  to  exalt  the  evi¬ 
dence  of  what  he  calls  experience  above  testimony  ; 
yet,  if  we  should  concede  it  to  him,  it  could  answer 
him  no  purpose,  since  we  have  shown  that  this  ex¬ 
perience  itself  depends  on  testimony.  Whatever  use 
he  can  make  of  this  principle  therefore  against  testi¬ 
mony,  can  be  turned  against  himself,  since  his  know¬ 
ledge  of  what  the  experience  of  the  world  is,  can 
only  be  obtained  by  the  report  of  witnesses,  who,  in 
different  ages,  have  observed  the  course  of  nature. 

8.  Mr.  Hume,  on  reflection,  seems  to  have  been 
convinced  that  his  argument  was  unsound;  for  in  a 
note  appended  to  his  Essay  on  Miracles,  he  makes 
a  concession  which  entirely  overthrows  the  whole. 
But  mark  the  disingenuity  (or  shall  I  not  rather  call 
it  the  malignity?)  which  is  manifested  in  this  only 
evidence  of  his  candour.  He  concedes  that  there 
may  be  miracles  of  such  a  kind  as  to  admit  of  proof 
from  human  testimony,  in  direct  contradiction  to  his 
reiterated  maxim,  and  in  complete  repugnance  to  all 
his  reasoning;  but  he  makes  the  concession  with  the 
express  reservation  that  it  shall  not  be  applied  to  the 
support  of  religion.  He  however  not  only  makes 
this  concession,  but  gives  an  example  of  such  mira¬ 
cles,  and  of  the  testimony  which  he  admits  to  be  suf¬ 
ficient  to  establish  it.  “ Suppose,”  says  he,  “all 
authors  in  all  languages  agree,  that  from  the  first  of 
January,  1600,  there  was  a  total  darkness  all  over 
the  earth  for  eight  days;  suppose  that  the  tradition 
of  this  event  is  still  strong  and  lively  among  the  peo¬ 
ple;  that  all  travellers  bring  us  accounts  of  the  same 
tradition,  &c. — it  is  evident  that  our  philoso¬ 
phers  OUGHT  TO  RECEIVE  IT  FOR  CERTAIN.”  Alld 

7 


74 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


this  is  a  part  of  the  same  Essay,  in  which  it  is-  said 
that  “a  miracle  supported  by  any  human  testimony, 
is  more  properly  a  subject  of  derision  than  of  argu¬ 
ment.”  “No  kind  of  testimony  for  any  kind  of  mi¬ 
racle  can  possibly  amount  to  a  probability,  much 
Jess  to  a  proof!” 

It  might  appear  that  after  so  complete  a  renuncia¬ 
tion  of  the  principle  which  at  first  he  so  strenuously 
asserted,  we  might  have  spared  ourselves  the  pains 
of  a  formal  refutation.  But  not  so.  The  author  is 
resolved  that  his  concession  shall  be  of  no  service 
whatever  to  religion.  Hear  his  own  words:  “But 
should  this  miracle  be  ascribed  to  any  new  system 
of  religion;  men  in  all  ages  have  been  so  imposed 
upon  by  ridiculous  stories  of  that  kind,  that,  this 
very  circumstance  would  be  full  proof  of  a  cheat  and 
sufficient  with  all  men  of  sense,  not  only  to  make 
them  reject  the  fact,  but  even  reject  it,  without 
further  examination.”  I  have  heard  of  a  maxim 
which  I  believe  the  Jesuits  introduced,  that  what  is 
false  in  theology  may  be  true  in  philosophy;  but  I 
never  could  have  expected  that  a  philosopher,  a 
logician,  and  a  metaphysician  too,  would  utter  any 
thing  so  unreasonable  and  so  marked  with  prejudice 
as  the  declaration  just  quoted.  The  fact  is  admitted 
to  have  such  evidence,  that  even  philosophers  ought 
to  receive  it  as  certain;  but  not  if  it  is  ascribed 
to  a  new  religion.  On  this  subject  no  evidence  is 
sufficient.  It  is  perfectly  unexceptionable  in  philoso¬ 
phy;  but  in  religion  a  sensible  man  will  reject  it, 
whatever  it  may  be,  even  without  further  examina¬ 
tion.  The  circumstance  of  its  being  a  miracle  con¬ 
nected  with  religion  is  sufficient,  in  his  opinion,  to 
prove  it  a  cheat,  however  complete  the  testimony. 
The  world,  it  seems,  has  been  so  imposed  on  by 
ridiculous  stories  of  this  kind,  that  we  must  not  even 
listen  to  any  testimony  in  favour  of  religious  mira¬ 
cles.  This  author  would  indeed  reduce  the  advo¬ 
cates  of  religion  to  an  awkward  dilemma.  They 
are  called  upon  to  produce  evidence  for  their  reli¬ 
gion,  but  if  they  adduce  it,  sensible  men  will  not 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


75 


notice  it;  even  if  it  is  good  every  where  else,  it 
must  go  for  nothing  in  religion.  Upon  these  prin¬ 
ciples,  we  might  indeed  give  up  the  contest;  but  we 
are  not  willing  to  admit  that  this  is  sound  logic,  or 
good  sense.  The  reason  assigned  for  proscribing, 
in  this  summary  way,  all  the  testimony  in  favour  of 
religion,  will  apply  to  other  subjects.  Men  have 
been  imposed  on  by  ridiculous  stories  in  philosophy, 
as  well  as  in  religion;  but  when  evidence  is  pro¬ 
posed,  shall  we  not  even  examine  it,  because  there 
have  been  impositions?  This  is  the  very  reason 
why  we  should  examine  with  care,  that  we  may 
distinguish  between  the  true  and  the  false. 

If  it  were  true,  that  miracles  had  often  been  ascrib¬ 
ed  to  new  religions,  it  would  not  prove  that  there 
never  were  any  true  miracles,  but  rather  the  contra¬ 
ry;  just  as  the  abounding  of  counterfeit  money  is 
evidence  that  there  is  some  genuine;  for  that  which 
has  no  existence  is  not  counterfeited.  But  the  clam¬ 
our  that  has  been  raised  by  infidels  about  new  reli¬ 
gions  being  commonly  founded  on  miracles,  or  the 
pretence  of  miracles,  has  very  little  foundation  in 
fact.  Beside  the  Jewish  and  Christian  religions, 
(which  are  indeed  ^parts  of  the  same,)  it  would,  I 
believe,  be  difficult  to  designate  any  other,  which 
claims  such  an  origin. 

After  all  that  has  been  said  of  the  false  maxims 
of  the  Jesuits,  I  doubt  whether  any  one  could  be 
selected  so  perfectly  at  war  with  reason,  as  this  of 
the  philosopher;  nay,  I  think  I  may  challenge  all 
the  enemies  of  revelation,  to  call  from  any  Christian 
writer  a  sentence  so  surcharged  with  prejudice. 

But,  to  do  justice  to  Mr.  Hume — though  he  seems 
to  have  closed  the  door  against  all.  discussion  on  our 
part — yet,  in  one  of  his  general  maxims,  he  leaves 
us  one  alternative.  The  maxim  is  this,  “That  no 
testimony  is  sufficient  to  establish  a  miracle,  unless  it 
be  of  such  a  kind,  that  its  falsehood  would  be  more 
miraculous  than  the  fact.7’  An  ingenious  writer*  has 
undertaken  to  meet  Mr.  Hume  on  his  own  ground, 

*  Dr.  Gleig. 


76 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


and  has  endeavoured  to  prove,  that  the  testimony 
of  the  apostles  and  early  Christians,  if  the  facts  re¬ 
ported  by  them  were  true,  is  a  greater  miracle  than 
any  which  they  have  recorded.  But  the  maxim,  as 
stated  by  Mr.  Hume,  is  not  correct.  With  the  change 
of  a  single  word,  perhaps  it  may  be  adopted,  and 
will  place  the  question  on  its  proper  ground.  The 
change  which  I  propose,  is  to  substitute  the  word 
improbable  for  miraculous.  And  it  will  then  read  : 
No  testimony  is  sufficient  to  establish  a  miracle ,  un¬ 
less  the  testimony  be  of  such  a  kind ,  that  its  false¬ 
hood  would  be  more  improbable ,  than  the  fact  which 
it  endeavours  to  establish.  The  ground  of  objection 
to  the  word  miraculous ,  is,  that  it  involves  a  false 
principle,  which  is,  that  facts  are  incredible  in  pro¬ 
portion  as  they  are  miraculous;  which  principle  he 
in  several  places  avows,  and  which  is  indeed  a,  car¬ 
dinal  point  in  his  system  of  evidence.  But  it  is  not 
true.  There  are  many  cases  which  might  be  pro¬ 
posed,  in  which,  of  two  events,  one  of  which  must 
be  true,  that  which  is  miraculous  is  more  probable 
than  the  one  which  is  merely  natural.  I  will  men¬ 
tion  only  one  at  present.  Man  was  either  immedi¬ 
ately  created  by  God,  or  he  proceeded'  from  some 
natural  cause.  Need  I  ask,  which  of  these  is  more 
probable?  and  yet  the  first  is  miraculous;  the  second 
is  not.  The  plain  truth  is,  that  in  all  cases,  the  fact 
which  has  most  evidence  is  most  probable,  whether 
it  be  miraculous  or  natural.  And  when  all  evidence 
relating  to  a  proposition  is  before  the  mind,  that  is 

TRUE  WHICH  IS  EASIEST  TO  BE  BELIEVED,  because  it 

is  easier  to  believe  with  evidence  than  against  it. 
We  are  willing,  therefore,  that  this  maxim,  as  now 
stated,  should  be  the  ground  of  our  decision,  and  we 
pledge  ourselves  to  prove  that  the  falsehood  of  the 
miracles  of  the  gospel  would  be  more  improbable, 
and  consequently  more  incredible,  than  the  truth  of 
the  facts  recorded  in  them. .  But  this  discussion  will 
be  reserved  for  another  place. 

To  conclude ;  since  it  has  been  shown  that  there  is 
no  antecedent  presumption  against  miracles  from  the 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  77 

nature  of  God,  or  from  the  laws  by  which  he  governs 
the  universe ;  since  a  miraculous  fact  is  not  more 
difficult  to  be  accomplished  by  omnipotence  than 
any  other;  since  miracles  are  no  further  improbable, 
than  as  they  are  unusual ;  since  they  are  the  most 
suitable  and  decisive  evidences  which  can  be  given 
of  a  revelation ;  since  even  by  the  concession  of  Mr. 
Hume  himself,  there  may  be  sufficient  testimony 
fully  to  establish  them  ;  and  since  the  many  false 
pretences  to  miracles,  and  the  general  disposition  to 
credit  them,  are  rather  proofs  that  they  have  existed 
than  the  contrary;  we  may  safely  conclude,  that  Mr. 
Hume’s  argument  on  this  subject  is  sophistical  and 
delusive;  and  that  so  far  from  being  incredible, 
whatever  may  be  their  evidence,  when  brought  to 
support  religion,  this  is,  of  all  others,  the  very  case 
in  which  they  are  most  reasonabe  and  credible. 

In  a  recent  popular,  but  anonymous  publication, 
entitled,  “  Essays  on  the  Pursuits  of  Truth,  on 
the  Progress  of  Knowledge,  and  the  Funda¬ 
mental  Principles  of  all  Evidence  and  Expec¬ 
tation,  by  the  Author  of  Essays  on  the  Forma¬ 
tion  and  Publication  of  Opinions,”  the  doctrine 
of  Hume,  on  the  subject  of  testimony,  has  been  ex¬ 
hibited  in  a  form  somewhat  new  and  imposing.  And 
as  this  writer  has  acquired  considerable  celebrity  in 
England,  and  his  Essays  have  been  published  in 
Philadelphia,  and  recommended  strongly  to  the  pub¬ 
lic  upon  the  authority  of  the  Westminster  Review , 
it  seems  necessary  to  guard  the  public  against  the 
insidious  design  of  the  writer.  The  ingenious  author, 
indeed,  never  brings  the  subject  of  divine  revelation 
directly  into  view,  in  all  that  he  has  written;  and  I 
believe,  the  word  <£  miracles”  does  not  occur  in  either 
of  the  volumes  which  he  has  published.  It  is  a  fact, 
however,  that  in  the  last  of  his  Essays  he  has  revi¬ 
ved,  in  substance,  the  famous  argument  of  Hume  on 
miracles ;  and  has,  with  even  more  concealed  sophis¬ 
try  than  the  celebrated  infidel  employed,  endeavour¬ 
ed  to  prove  that  no  testimony,  however  strong,  is 
sufficient  to  establish  any  fact  which  involves  a  de- 

7* 


78 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


viation  from  the  regular  course  of  the  laws  of  nature. 
That  I  may  not  be  suspected  of  misrepresenting  the 
sentiments  of  this  discriminating  and  popular  writer, 
I  will  here  insert  an  extract  from  the  essay  before 
mentioned,  which  contains  the  substance  of  the  whole 
argument. 

“Testimony  must  be  either  oral  or  written.  As 
far  as  the  mere  physical  circumstances  are  concerned, 
we  evidently  commence  our  use  of  it  by  reasoning 
from  effects  to  causes.  We  infer,  for  example,  that 
the  writing  before  us  has  been  the  work  of  some 
human  being,  in  doing  which  we  of  course  assume 
the  uniformity  of  causation.  If  from  the  circum¬ 
stances  attending  the  testimony  we  infer  that  it  is 
entitled  to  be  received  as  veracious;  if,  for  instance, 
we  find  that  it  has  proceeded  from  a  man  of  tried 
integrity,  and  who  acted  under  the  influence  of  mo¬ 
tives  which  render  it  unlikely  that  he  should  deceive, 
our  inference  still  proceeds  on  the  assumption  of  the 
same  principle.  I  may  have,  in  other  cases,  found 
these  circumstances,  to  have  been  the  precursors  or 
causes  of  true  testimony ;  but  how  can  I  or  any  one 
tell  that  they  have  operated  in  the  same  way  in  the 
instance  before  me?  The  reply  must  evidently  be, 
that  it  is  impossible  to  avoid  assuming  that  the  same 
causes  have  invariably  the  same  effects. 

“  In  fact,  if  we  examine  any  of  the  rules  which 
have  been  laid  down  for  the  reception  of  the  testimo¬ 
ny,  or  any  of  those  marks  which  have  been  pointed 
out  as  enabling  us  to  judge  of  its  credibility,  we  shall 
find  them  all  involving  the  uniformity  of  causation. 
It  is  allowed  on  all  hands,  that  the  concurrence  of  a 
number  of  witnesses  in  the  same  assertion,  their  re¬ 
putation  for  veracity,  the  faet  of  the  testimony  being 
against  their  own  interest,  the  probability  of  detec¬ 
tion  in  any  false  statements,  are  all  circumstances 
enhancing  the  credibility  of  what  they  affirm.  These 
are  considered  as  general  principles  on  the  subject 
gathered  from  experience,  and  we  apply  them  in¬ 
stinctively  to  any  new  case  which  may  be  presented 
to  us,  either  in  the  course  of  our  own  observation,  or 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


79 


as  having  taken  place  at  some  former  period.  But 
it  is  obvious  from  what  has  just  been  said,  that  unless 
we  assume  a  uniformity  in  the  succession,  of  causes 
and  effects,  we  cannot  transfer  our  experience  from 
any  one  case  to  another.  That  certain  circumstances 
have  produced  true  testimony  in  one  or  a  hundred 
instances,  can  be  no  reason  why  they  should  produce 
it  in  a  different  instance,  unless  we  assume  that  the 
same  causes  have  necessarily  the  same  effects. 

“  It  is  clearly  shown  by  this  reasoning,  that  in  the 
reception  of  testimony  and  the  use  of  physical  evi¬ 
dence  we  proceed  on  the  same  principle.  But  in  the 
case  of  testimony  there  is  a  peculiarity  not  belonging 
to  physical  evidence.  In  the  former  we  not  only 
have  certain  effects  from  which  it  is  our  task  to  infer 
the  causes,  or  certain  causes  from  which  to  infer  the 
effects;  as  when  we  judge  the  writing  before  us  to 
have  been  tha  work  of  some  human  being,  or  the 
testimony  to  be  true  on  account  of  the  circumstances 
under  which  it  was  given;  but  the  testimony  itself 
consists  of  the  assertion  of  facts,  and  the  nature  of 
the  facts  asserted  often  forms  part  of  the  grounds  on 
which  the  veracity  of  the  testimony  is  determined; 
it  frequently  happens,  that  while  external  circum¬ 
stances  tend  to  confirm  the  testimony,  the  nature  and 
circumstances  of  the  facts  attested  render  it  highly 
improbable  that  any  such  facts  should  have  taken 
place,  and  these  two  sets  of  circumstances  may  be  so 
exactly  equivalent  as  to  leave  the  mind  in  irremedia¬ 
ble  doubt.  In  the  consideration  of  both,  however, 
the  same  assumption  is  involved.  We  think  the  facts 
improbable,  because  we  have  found  them  rarely 
occurring  under  the  circumstances  stated;  we  think 
the  testimony  likely  to  be  true,  because  we  have 
generally  found  true  testimony  to  proceed  from  wit¬ 
nesses  acting  under  the  influence  of  similar  motives, 
and  what  we  have  found  to  happen  in  other  cases 
we  are  irresistibly  led  to  conclude  must  also  happen 
in  the  case-  before  us. 

“  The  opposition  of  the  circumstances  of  the  evi¬ 
dence  and  the  nature  of  the  facts  may  be  carried  still 


80 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


further.  Assertions  are  frequently  made  which  in 
themselves  imply  a  breach  of  uniformity  of  causation. 
From  such  cases  the  conclusions  already  established 
remove  all  difficulty.  To  weigh  probabilities,  to  de¬ 
termine  what  credit  is  due  to  two  sets  of  conflicting 
circumstances,  neither  of  which  as  far  as  our  know¬ 
ledge  extends,  is  irreconcilable  to  the  usual  course  of 
nature,  is  often  a  nice  and  arduous  task;  but  if  the 
principles  of  this  essay  are  correct,  it  is  easy  to  see 
what  reception  ought  to  be  given  to  assertions  pro¬ 
fessedly  implying  a  deviation  from  the  uniform  suc¬ 
cession  of  causes  and  effects. 

“  Suppose,  for  instance,  any  person  to  affirm  that 
he  had  exposed  a  cubic  inch  of  ice  to  a  temperature 
of  two  hundred  degrees  of  Fahrenheit,  and  that  at 
the  expiration  of  an  hour  it  had  retained  its  solidity. 
Here  is  l  sequence  of  events  asserted  which  is 
entirely  at  variance  with  the  admitted  course  of  na¬ 
ture  ;  and  the  slightest  reflection  is  sufficient  to  show, 
that  to  believe  the  assertion  would  involve  a  logical 
absurdity.  The  intrinsic  discrepancy  of  the  facts 
could  never  be  overcome  by  any  possible  proofs  of 
the  truth  of  the  testimony. 

“  For  let  us  put  the  strongest  case  imaginable;  let 
us  suppose  that  the  circumstance  of  the  ice  remain¬ 
ing  unmelted,  rests  on  the  concurrent  testimony  of  a 
great  number  of  people,  people  too  of  reputation, 
science,  and  perspicacity,  who  had  no  motive  for 
falsehood,  who  had  discernment  to  perceive,  and 
honesty  to  tell  the  real  truth,  and  whose  interests 
would  essentially  suffer  from  any  departure  from 
veracity.  Under  such  circumstances  false  testimony 
it  may  be  alleged  is  impossible. 

“  Now  mark  the  principle  on  which  this  represen¬ 
tation  proceeds.  Let  us  concede  the  positions,  that 
what  is  attested  by  a  great  number  of  witnesses  must 
inevitably  be  true, — that  people  of  reputation  and 
intelligence  without  any  apparent  motive  for  false-, 
hood  are  invariably  accurate  in  their  testimony,  and 
that  they  are  above  all,  incapable  of  violating  truth, 
when  a  want  of  veracity  would  be  ruinous  to  their 


EVIDENCES  OE  CHRISTIANITY. 


81 


interests.  Granting  all  this,  I  ask  the  objector,  how 
he  knows  that  these  things  are  so ;  that  men  of  this 
character  and  in  these  circumstances  speak  truth? 
He  will  reply  that  he  has  invariably  found  them  to 
act  in  this  manner:  but  why,  because  you  found 
them  to  act  in  this  manner  in  a  few  or  even  in  many 
cases,  within  your  own  experience  or  in  the  experi¬ 
ence  of  ages,  do  you  conclude  that  they  have  acted 
so  in  all  cases  and  in  the  case  before  us  ?  The  only 
answer  is,  that  it  is  impossible  not  to  take  for  grant¬ 
ed,  that  in  precisely  similar  circumstances  similar 
results  will  ensue,  or  that  like  causes  have  always 
like  effects. 

“  Thus  on  the  ground  of  unifomrity  of  causation, 
he  would  be  maintaining  the  competency  of  testi¬ 
mony  to  prove  a  fact  which  implies  a  deviation  from 
that  uniformity.7’ 

It  will  abbreviate  the  answer  to  this  specious  argu¬ 
ment,  to  acknowledge,  that  the  general  principle 
which  this  author  takes  so  much  pains  to  establish, 
and  on  which  he  builds  his  reasoning,  is  freely  ad¬ 
mitted  to  be  not  only  correct,  but  self-evident.  That 
the  same  causes  uniformly  produce  the  same  effects, 
is  a  truth  so  obvious,  and  so  generally  admitted,  that 
it  was  unnecessary  for  the  ingenious  author  of  this 
essay,  to  spend  so  much  time  in  rendering  it  evident. 
And  I  am  willing  to  admit  its  certainty  to  be  as  un¬ 
doubted  in  moral,  as  in  physical  subjects.  But  while 
I  freely  admit,  that  the  same  causes  will  uniformly  be 
followed  by  the  same  effects,  I  do  by  no  means  accede 
to  the  proposition,  which  our  author  seems  to  consider 
as  of  the  same  import;  namely,  that  the  course  of  na¬ 
ture,  or  the  laws  of  nature,  never  have  been  interrupt¬ 
ed,  or  suspended  :  and  the  whole  appearance  of  force 
and  plausibility  which  the  argument  of  this  writer 
possesses,  arises  from  the  artful  confounding  of  these 
distinct  propositions.  I  agree,  that  no  testimony  can 
be  strong  enough  to  induce  a  rational  man  to  believe 
that  the  same  causes  will  not.be  attended  with  the 
same  effects;  for  this  would  be  to  assent  to  an  evi¬ 
dent  absurdity.  But  it  is  an  entirely  different  thing 


82 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


to  believe  that  the  laws  of  nature  have  sometimes 
been  suspended ;  for  in  this  case,  we  suppose,  that 
an  extraordinary  cause  has  intervened.  To  believe 
that  a  divine  power  has  interposed  to  change  the 
course  of  nature,  is  surely  not  the  same  thing,  as  to 
believe  that  the  same  cause  which  commonly  pro¬ 
duced  one  effect,  is  now  attneded  by  another  entirely 
different.  The  natural  causes,  it  is  true,  remain  the 
same,  but  the  general  proposition  stated .  above,  is 
not  true,  if  confined  only  to  these.  If  there  exist 
supernatural  causes,  or  a  power  superior  to  the  laws 
of  nature — and  this  our  author  does  not  profess  to 
deny — then  the  laws  of  nature,  or  mere  natural 
causes  may  remain  the  same;  and  yet,  by  the  opera¬ 
tion  of  these  supernatural  causes,  effects  entirely 
diverse  from  those  that  would  be  the  sequence  of 
natural  causes,  may  take  place.  And  the  author 
himself  seems  in  one  place  to  have  been  aware  of 
this  distinction,  and  to  admonish  the  reader  of  its 
existence;  and  yet,  through  the  whole  of  the  argu¬ 
ment  he  proceeds,  as  if  the  two  propositions  were 
identical.  He  ought,  however,  to  have  recollected, 
that  while  no  man  in  his  senses  disbelieves  the  first 
proposition,  much  the  greater  number  of  men  have 
believed,  that  in  some  cases,  the  laws  of  nature  have 
been  suspended;  not,  that  they  thought  that  the 
same  causes  did  not,  in  these  instances,  produce  the 
same  effects,  but  that  other  causes  of  greater  potency, 
than  natural  causes,  were  put  into  operation. 

When  our  author,  therefore,  infers  from  the  uni¬ 
formity  of  causation,  that  no  testimony  is  sufficient 
to  be  the  foundation  of  a  rational  belief,  that  there 
has  been  a  deviation  from  the  common  course  of 
nature,  he  applies  a  correct  principle  to  a  case  to 
which  it  evidently  does  not  belong.  Because  the 
same  cause  must  produce  the  same  effects,  does  it 
follow,  that  when  another  and  superior  cause  ope¬ 
rates,  the  same  effects  must  be  produced?  This 
would  be  indirect  repugnance  to  his  own  maxim. 
Then,  before  this  principle  of  the  uniformity  of  causes 
and  effects  can  be  applied,  it  must  be  demonstrated. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  83 

that  in  the  case  under  consideration,  no  other  causes 
operate,  but  such  as  are  usual  and  natural,  and  when¬ 
ever  he  shall  be  able  to  establish  this,  there  will  be 
no  further  contest  respecting  the  matter. 

That  I  do  not  misrepresent  the  argument  of  the 
author  will  appear  satisfactorily,  by  considering  the 
cases  which  he  had  adduced.  “  Suppose,  for  in¬ 
stance,”  says  he,  “  any  person  to  affirm,  that  he  had 
exposed  a  cubic  inch  of  ice  to  a  temperature  of  two 
hundred  degrees  of  Fahrenheit,  and  that  at  the  expi¬ 
ration  of  an  hour,  it  had  retained  its  solidity.  Here 
is  a  sequence  of  events  asserted,  which  is  entirely  at 
variance  with  the  admitted  course  of  nature ;  and  the 
slightest’  reflection  is  sufficient  to  show,  that  to  be¬ 
lieve  the  assertion,  would  involve  a  logical  absurdity. 
The  intrinsic-  discrepancy  of  the  facts  could  never  be 
overcome  by  any  possible  proofs  of  the  truth  of  testi¬ 
mony.” 

In  another  page,  he  says,  “  If  a  number  of  men 
were  to  swear,  that  they  had  seen  the  mercury  of 
the  barometer  remain  at  the  height  of  thirty  inches, 
when  placed  in  the  exhausted  receiver  of  an  air- 
pump,  their  testimony  would  be  instantly  rejected. 
The  universal  conclusion  would  be,  that  such  an 
event  was  impossible.”  What  is  here  confidently 
asserted,  would  only  be  true  upon  the  supposition, 
that  no  causes  but  such  as  were  natural  operated  in 
the  cases  adduced;  but  on  the  hypothesis  of  the  ope¬ 
ration  of  a  supernatural  cause,  there  would  neither 
be  absurdity  nor  impossibility  in  either  of  the  facts. 
What !  could  not  He,  who  established  these  laws, 
and  gave  to  heat  and  air,  respectively,  their  peculiar 
power  and  qualities,  suspend  their  usual  operation? 
Could  not  He  cause  the  ice  to  remain  unmelted  in 
any  temperature;  and  the  mercury  to  remain  sus¬ 
pended,  without  the  pressure  of  the  atmosphere  ? 
But  the  sophistical  nature  of  the  argument  used,  is 
most  evident.  The  principle  is,  that  similar  causes 
must  have  similar  effects.  Very  good — what  then  ? 
Why,  if  ice  remain  unmelted  at  two  hundred  degrees 
of  Fahrenheit,  then  this  principle  would  be  violated 


84 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


I  answer,  not  at  all,  provided  another  cause  is  in 
operation,  of  such  potency  as  to  counteract  the  usual 
effects  of  caloric;  or  to  counteract  the  gravity  of  the 
quicksilver,  in  vacuo.  And  it  will  not  do  to  allege, 
that  God,  who  established  these  laws,  will  not  con¬ 
travene  them,  on  any  occasion;  for  this  would  be  an 
entire  change  of  the  ground  of  the  argument,  and  a 
relinquishment  of  the  principle  on  which  the  reason¬ 
ing  of  our  author  is  founded.  Besides,  it  would  be 
a  mere  begging  of  the  question  in  dispute. 

Now,  in  both  the  cases  adduced  by  this  writer,  to 
illustrate  and  confirm  his  argument,  on  which  he 
pronounces  so  confidently,  that  the  judgment  of  men 
would  universally  reject  any  testimony,  I  beg  leave 
to  be  of  a  different  opinion,  and  will  appeal  to  the 
common  sense  of  all  reflecting  men,  whether,  on  the 
supposition,  that  a  dozen  men,  of  perspicacity  and 
undoubted  integrity,  should  solemnly  affirm  that  they 
had  seen  a  cubic  inch  of  ice  remain  an  hour  unmelt¬ 
ed  at  two  hundred  degrees  of  Fahrenheit,  whether 
they  could  refuse  their  assent,  even  if  they  knew  of  no 
good  reason  why  the  laws  of  nature  should  be  sus¬ 
pended?  But  if  they  knew  that  an  important  pur¬ 
pose  in  the  divine  government  could  be  answered  by 
such  a  miracle,  much  less  testimony  would  be  suffi¬ 
cient  to  produce  unwavering  conviction  of  the  truth  of 
the  extraordinary  fact.  And  while  -they  assent  to  such 
facts,  on  sufficient  testimony,  they  are  guilty  of  no 
absurdity,  and  violate  no  rule  of  common  sense.  It 
is  true,  that  the  credibility  of  the  event  reported, 
may  be  reduced  to  this  question — whether  it  is  more 
probable,  that  the  laws  of  nature  should,  for  a  good 
end,  be  suspended,  or  that  twelve  men  of  tried  vera¬ 
city,  should  agree  to  assert  a  falsehood,  without  any 
motive  to  induce  them  to  do  so?  And  here  our  in¬ 
genious  author  revives  the  metaphysical  balance  of 
Mr.  Hume;  and  after  admitting  that  the  evidence 
from  testimony  may  be  so  strong  that  nothing  is 
wanting  to  give  it  force,  yet  the  maxim  that  the 
same  causes  may  have  the  same  effects,  is  also  a 
•ruth  so  certain,  that  no  evidence  can  countervail  it. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


85 


We  have,  therefore,  according  to  this  statement,  the 
equipoise  of  evidence,  which  we  have  already  con¬ 
sidered,,  in  Mr.  Hume’s  argument.  The  rational 
mind,  in  such  circumstances,  must  remain  neutral;  it 
can  neither  believe  nor  disbelieve  ;  for  the  evidence 
for  the  one  exactly  counterbalances  that  for  the  other. 
But  after  stating  this  hypothesis,  our  author  finds 
that  the  evidence  from  testimony  never  can  be  so 
convincing,  as  that  which  we  have  for  the  uniformi¬ 
ty  of  causation.  His  words  are — “  If  the  rejection 
and  the  admission  of  the  testimony  equally  implied 
a  deviation  from  the  uniform  terms  of  causes  and 
effects,  there  could  be  no  reason  for  rejecting  or  ad¬ 
mitting  it.”  “But  the  rejection  of  the  testimony  is 
not  in  this  predicament.  The  causes  of  testimony, 
of  in  other  words,  those  considerations  which  oper¬ 
ate  on  the  minds  of  the  witness,  cannot  always  be 
ascertained;  and  as  we  are  uncertain  as  to  the  causes 
in  operation,  we  cannot  be  certain  of  the  effect;  we 
cannot  be  sure  that  the  circumstances  of  the  witness 
are  such  as  have  given  rise  to  true  testimony,  and 
consequently  we  cannot  be  sure  that  the  testimony  is 
true.” 

On  this  whole  subject  I  have  several  remarks  to 
make.  First,  this  method  of  destroying  the  equipoise 
of  evidence  granted  by  Mr.  Hume,  and  conceded  by 
our  author,  is  not  altogether  fair;  because  it  does  not 
admit  what  is  obviously  true,  that  in  regard  to  some 
kinds  of  testimony,  the  evidence  is  so  certain,  that 
we  might  as  soon  doubt  our  own  existence  as  the 
truth  of  the  facts  attested.  Now,  this  being  the  case, 
there  was  no  propriety  in  representing  all  testimony 
as  being  involved  in  some  degree  of  uncertainty. 

Again,  what  is  here  said  of  testimony  will  apply 
just  as  fully  to  what  we  ourselves  witness,  and  for 
the  truth  of  which  we  have  the  testimony  of  our  own 
senses.  I  mean,  that  if  the  argument  of  our  author 
is  at  all  valid,  it  will  prove,  that  if  we  saw  the  ice 
remain  unmelted  in  the*heat,  and  beheld  it  ever  so 
often,  and  found  that  thousands  around  us  received 
the  same  impression,  we  must  not  credit  our  own 

8 


86 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


senses,  nor  believe  what  we  saw  with  our  own  eyes; 
because,  however  certain  this  kind  of  evidence  may 
be,  it  cannot  be  more  certain  than  the  principle,  that 
the  same  causes  will  uniformly  produce  the  same 
effects.  Therefore,  although  we  should,  under  all 
manner  of  circumstances,  see  such  events,  they  could 
not  be  believed ;  for  to  believe  them  would  be  a 
logical  absurdity.  And  thus  would  these  men,  by 
their  metaphysics,  reason  us  out  of  the  evidence  of 
our  very  eye-sight.  I  know,  indeed,  that  neither 
Hume,  nor  the  author  whose  reasoning  we  are  now 
considering,  has  pushed  the  argument  to  this  its  just 
consequence;  but  I  would  defy  any  man  to  show, 
that  it  is  not  as  applicable  to  the  evidence  of  the 
senses  as  to  that  derived  from  testimony.  Now,  as 
the  kind  of  evidence  which  will  invariably  command 
assent,  is  not  learned  by  metaplwsical  reasoning,  but 
by  experience,  I  would  leave  the  matter  to  be  decided 
by  every  man  of  impartial  judgment,  for  himself. 
Every  man  knows  whether  or  not  he  would  believe 
his  own  eyes,  if  he  should  see  ice  remain  unmelted 
in  two  hundred  degrees  of  temperature,  according  to 
Fahrenheit :  or  whether  he  would  say,  “  it  seems  to 
be  so,  but  it  cannot  be  true,  because  it  contradicts  a 
self-evident  principle,  that  the  same  causes  must 
always  be  followed  by  the  same  effects.”  To  which 
a  man  of  plain,  unsophisticated  common  sense  would 
reply,  “  I  must  believe  my  own  senses ;  if  doing  so 
contradicts  a  thousand  abstract  principles,  I  care  not 
— f  seeing  is  believing.7  57  And  the  same  may  be 
said  in  regard  to  testimony.  Suppose  a  thousand 
persons  entirely  disinterested  to  aver,  that  they  had 
seen  ice  remain  unmelted  in  a  very  high  tempera¬ 
ture,  we  could  not  but  believe  them,  account  for  the 
fact  as  we  might.  But  we  have  already  proved,  that 
believing  in  such  an  event  violates  no  maxim,  but 
only  supposes  that  some  extraordinary  power  or 
cause  is  in  operation ;  and  when  it  is  understood, 
that  this  deviation  from  the  laws  of  nature  is  intend¬ 
ed  to  confirm  the  declarations  of  some  person  who 
claims  to  be  a  messenger  of  God,  there  is  not  only  no 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


87 


absurdity  in  the  thing,  but  all  presumption  against 
the  probability  of  such  supernatural  interposition  is 
removed,  as  has  been  shown  in  the  argument  on  that 
subject. 

It  might  also  be  demonstrated,  that  upon  the  prin¬ 
ciples  of  this  author,  it  would  be  absurd,  upon  any 
evidence,  to  believe  not  only  in  a  fact  which  involved 
a  real  deviation  from  the  laws  of  nature,  but  in  any 
one  which  was  entirely  different  from  all  our  own  ex¬ 
perience  of  the  laws  of  nature.  For  if  it  would  be  ab¬ 
surd  to  believe,  on  the  testimony  of  thousands  of  un¬ 
connected  witnesses,  that  ice  did  not  melt  in  a  certain 
case  when  placed  in  the  fire;  then  it  was  altogether 
rational  for  the  king  of  Siam,  and  all  others  in  similar 
circumstances,  to  disbelieve  the  fact  that  water  had 
been  known  to  become  as  hard  as  a  stone,  so  that 
men  and  animals  could  walk  upon  it.  Persons  so 
situated  never  could  know  that  such  an  effect  existed, 
but  by  testimony;  yet  as  this  testimony  contradicted 
all  their  own  experience  about  the  laws  of  nature,  in 
relation  to  water,  they  ought  rather  to  reject  the  tes¬ 
timony,  however  strong,  than  to  credit  a  fact  which 
seemed  to  involve  a  deviation  from the  sequence 
of  cause  and  effect,”  to  use  the  language  of  this 
author.  And  thus  we  should  be  reduced  to  the 
necessity  of  rejecting  all  facts  not  consonant  to  our 
own  personal  experience;  for  to  receive  them  on  the 
ground  of  testimony,  would  be  to  violate  the  princi¬ 
ple  that  causation  is  uniform. 

But  the  zeal  of  our  author  to  establish  his  favour¬ 
ite  point,  has  led  him,  not  only  to  assert  that  a  devia¬ 
tion  from  the  regular  succession  of  the  laws  of  nature 
was  incredible  on  the  ground  of  testimony,  but  that 
it  is,  in  the  nature  of  things,  impossible.  In  this 
assertion  he  certainly  may  lay  claim  to  originality; 
for  I  believe  no  one  before  him,  not  even  Hume,  has 
gone  so  far  in  bold  affirmation.  His  words  are — 
“  An  event  is  impossible  which  contradicts  our  expe¬ 
rience,  or  which  implies  that  the  same  causes  have 
produced  different  effects,  or  the  same  effects  been 
preceded  by  different  causes.  Tims,  when  we  pro- 


88 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


nounce  that  it  was  impossible  for  a  piece  of  ice  to 
remain  in  the  midst  of  burning  coals  without  being 
dissolved,  our  conclusion  involves  a  complete  know¬ 
ledge  of  this  particular  effect  of  fire  on  ice.” 

And  he  is  so  confident  that  this  is  the  true  import 
of  the  word  impossible ,  that  he  says,  “  If  I  am  not 
greatly  deceived,  the  acutest  reasoner,  the  closest 
thinker,  the  most  subtle  analyser  of  words,  will  find 
himself  unable  to  produce  any  other  meaning  of  the 
term  impossible,  than  that  which  is  here  assigned  to 
it.”  But  he  seems  to  have  felt  that  he  had  gone 
too  far  in  this  dogmatical,  and  I  must  say,  irrational 
assertion;  for  in  a  note  he  himself  gives  another,  and 
one  of  the  true  meanings  of  the  word  impossible. 
But  as  confident  assertion,  accompanied  by  no  proof 
nor  reason,  is  sufficiently  answered  by  a  confident 
denial,  I  would  take  the  liberty  of  saying,  therefore, 
that  if  I  am  not  greatly  mistaken,  no  accurate  philo¬ 
logist  will  admit  that  this  is  the  true  meaning  of  the 
word  impossible.  And  certainly,  men  of  plain  com¬ 
mon  sense  never  can  be  persuaded,  that  it  is  impos¬ 
sible  for  the  succession  of  events  according  to  the 
laws  of  nature,  to  be  changed.  It  is  true,  when  we 
confine  our  ideas  to  the  mere  powers  and  qualities 
of  nature,  we  do  assert  that  their  effects  will  be  uni- 
form,  and  that  it  is  impossible  that  the  same  causes 
should  produce  different  effects;  but  when  we  extend 
our  views  to  the  Great  First  Cause,  it  is  not  only 
absurd,  but  impious,  to  assert  that  he  cannot  suspend 
or  alter  the  laws  of  nature.  Nothing  is  impossible 
to  him  which  does  not  imply  a  contradiction,  or  is 
not  repugnant  to  his  attributes. 

The  conclusion  which  is  rational  on  this  subject, 
is,  that  all  things  are  possible  to  God,  and  whatever 
is  possible  may  be  believed  on  sufficient  testimony; 
which  testimony,  however,  must  be  strong,  in  pro¬ 
portion  to  the  improbability  of  the  event  to  be  con¬ 
firmed. 


I 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


89 


CHAPTER  VII. 

>  /■ 

THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  GOSPEL  ARE  CREDIBLE 

-  {  .  '  ‘ 

Having  shown,  in  the  preceding  chapter,  that  mira¬ 
cles  may  be  so  attested  as  to  be  credible,  I  come  now 
to  examine  the  evidence  by  which  the  miraculous 
facts  recorded  in  the  New  Testament  are  established. 
This  is  the  main  point  in  our  inquiry;  for  after  all 
that  has  been  said,  it  must  be  admitted  that  unless 
the  Christian,  religion  is  attended  with  sufficient  evi¬ 
dence,  we  cannot  believe  in  it,  even  if  we  would. 

Before  entering  directly  on  this  discussion  it  may 
be  useful  to  premise  a  few  things  respecting  the  na¬ 
ture  and  force  of  testimony,  which,  it  is  presumed, 
will  be  admitted  by  all  who  have  attended  to  the 
subject.  This  species  of  evidence  admits  of  all  con¬ 
ceivable  degrees,  from  the  weakest  probability  to  the 
fullest  assurance;  for  while,  on  this  ground,  we  yield 
to  some  reports  the  most  hesitating  assent,  we  are 
as  certainly  persuaded  of  others  as  of  those  things 
which  we  perceive  by  our  senses,  or  have  demon¬ 
strated  by.  mathematical  reasoning. 

The  exact  force  of  testimony  cannot  be  calculated 
by  rule  nor  estimated  by  reason,  but  is  known  only 
from  experience.  Many  things  are  believed  on  tes¬ 
timony  with  the  most  unwavering  confidence,  when 
we  are  utterly  unable  to  explain  the  precise  ground 
on  which  our  conviction  rests.  The  sources  of  our 
information  have  been  so  numerous,  and  the  same 
facts  presented  to  us  in  so  many  forms,  that  it  is  im¬ 
possible  to  attribute  to  each  its  influence  in  gaining 
our  assent.  If  we  were  asked  on  what  particular 
testimony  we  believe  there  is  such  a  place  as  Rome, 
or  why  we  believe  that  such  a  person  as  Bonaparte 
lately  figured  in  Europe,  we  could  only  answer,  in 
the  general,  that  multiplied  testimonies  of  these  facts 

8* 


90 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


had  reached  us  so  that  all  possibility  of  doubting  was 
excluded.  The  same  assurance,  and  resting  on  the 
same  grounds,  is  experienced  in  relation  to  facts 
which  occurred  in  ages  long  past.  Who  can  bring 
himself  to  doubt  whether  such  persons  as  Julius 
Ceesar,  Paul,  Mohammed,  Columbus,  or  Luther  ever 
existed? 

When  we  have  obtained  evidence  to  a  certain 
amount,  nothing  is  gained  by  the  admission  of  more. 
The  mind  becomes,  as  it  were,  saturated,  and  no  in¬ 
crease  of  conviction  is  produced  by  multiplying  wit¬ 
nesses.  One  sound  demonstration  of  a  theorem  in 
mathematics  is  as  good  as  a  hundred.  A  few  up¬ 
right  witnesses  who  agree  and  are  uncontradicted  by 
other  evidence,  are  as  satisfactory  as  any  conceivable 
number.  On  a  trial  for  murder,  if  there  were  a 
thousand  witnesses  who  could  attest  the  fact,  a  judi¬ 
cious  court  would  not  deem  it  necessary  to  examine 
more  than  half  a  dozen,  or  at  most  a  dozen,  if  there 
were  a  perfect  agreement  in  their  testimony.  Expe¬ 
rience  only  can  inform  us  what  degree  of  evidence 
will  produce  complete  conviction;  but  we  may  judge 
from  former  experience  what  will  be  the  effect  of  the 
same  evidence  in  future,  and  from  the  effect  on  our 
own  minds,  what  it  will  be  on  the  minds  of  others. 

Testimony,  not  of  the  strongest  kind,  may  be 
so  corroborated  by  circumstances,  and  especially  by 
the  existing  consequences  of  the  facts  reported,  that 
it  may  be  rendered  credible  and  even  irresistible. 
Should  an  historian  of  doubtful  credit  assert  that  an 
eclipse  of  the  sun  occurred  on  a  certain  day  and  was 
visible  in  a  certain  place;  if  we  possessed  no  other 
evidence  of  the  fact,  it  might  be  considered  doubtful 
whether  the  testimony  was  true  or  false ;  but  if  by 
astronomical  calculation  it  should  be  found,  that 
there  must  have  been  an  eclipse  of  the  sun  at  that 
time,  and  visible  at  that  place,  the  veracity  of ,  the 
witness  would  be  confirmed  beyond  all  possibility  of 
doubt.  Or  should  we  find  it  recorded  by  an  anony¬ 
mous  author,  that  an  earthquake  at  a  certain  time 
had  overthrown  a  certain  city;  without  further  evi- 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


91 


deuce,  we  should  yield  but  a  feeble  assent  to  the 
statement;  but  if  on  personal  observation  or  by  the 
report  of  respectable  travellers,  it  was  ascertained, 
that  the  ruins  of  an  ancient  city  existed  in  that  place, 
we  should  consider  the  truth  of  the  history  as  suffi¬ 
ciently  established. 

The  evidences,  of  the  Christian  religion  mdy  he 
sufficient,  and  yet  not  so  strong  as  inevitably  to  pro¬ 
duce  conviction.  Our  conduct  in  the  pursuit  and 
reception  of  truth  may  he  intended  by  our  Creator  to 
be  an  important  part  of  the  probation  to  which  we 
are  subjected;  and  therefore  the  evidence  of  revela¬ 
tion  is  not  so  great  as  to  be  irresistible,  but  is  of  such 
a  kind,  that  the  sincere  and  diligent  inquirer  will  be 
in  no  danger  of  fatal  mistake-;  while  men  of  pride 
and  prejudice,  who  prefer  darkness  to  light,  will  be 
almost  sure  to  err.* 

It  is  natural  for  all  men  to  speak  the  truth;  false¬ 
hood  requires  an  effort.  Wicked  men  lie  only  when 
they  have  some  sinister  end  in  view.  Combinations 
to  deceive  are  never  formed,  but  with  a  vievv  to 
accomplish  some  object  desirable  to  those  concerned. 
No  set  of  men  will  be  at  the  trouble  of  forging  and 
propagating  a  falsehood,  which  promises  them  no 
profit  or  gratification.  Much  less  will  they  engage 
in  such  an  enterprise,  with  the  view  of  bringing  evil 
on  themselves,  or  when  they  foresee  that  it  can  be 
productive  of  nothing  but  pain  and  reproach.' 

Between  truth  and  falsehood  there  is  so  great  a 
difference,  that  it  is  extremely  difficult  for  the  latter 
so  effectually  to  assume  the  garb  and  exhibit  the 
aspect  of  the  former  as,  upon  a  strict  scrutiny,  not  to 
be  detected.  No  imposture  can  stand  the  test  of 
rigid  inquiry.  The  style  and  manner  of  truth  are 
entirely  different  from  those  of  falsehood.  The  one 
pursues  a  direct  course,  is  candid,  unaffected,  and 
honest;  the  other  is  evasive,  cunning,  tortuous,  and 
inconsistent;  and  is  often  betrayed  by  the  efforts 
made  to  avoid  detection. 

When  both  sides  of  a  question  are  pressed  with 
*  See  Pascal’s  Thoughts. 


92 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


difficulties,  reason  teaches  us  to  choose  that  which  is 
attended  with  the  fewest.  Objectors  to  Christianity 
often  forget  to  notice  the  difficulties  of  their  own 
hypothesis.  Every  question  has  two  sides;  if  we 
reject  the  affirmative,  we  of  necessity  receive  the 
negative  with  all  the  consequences  which  may  bur¬ 
den  it.  If  we  reject  the  evidence  of  Christianity  and 
deny  that  miracles  ever  existed,  we  are  bound  to 
account  for  the  existence  of  the  Christian  Church, 
,and  for  the  conduct  of  the  first  preachers  and  primi¬ 
tive  believers,  on  other  principles.  And  whoever 
seriously  undertakes  this  will  impose  on  himself  a 
difficult  task.  Gibbon  has  put  forth  his  strength  on 
this  subject  with  very  small  success.  His  account 
of  the  origin  of  Christianity  is  very  unsatisfactory 
and  totally  defective  in  historical  evidence.* 

If  the  evidence  on  both  sides  of  an  important  ques¬ 
tion  appear  to  be  pretty  equally  balanced,  it  is  the 
dictate  of  wisdom  to  lean  to  the  safe  side.  In  this 
question,  undoubtedly,  the  safe  side  is  that  of  reli¬ 
gion;  for  if  we  should  be  mistaken  here,  we  shall 
suffer  no  loss  and  obtain  some  good  by  our  error; 
but  a  mistake  on  the  other  side  must  prove  fatal. 

When  a  proposition  has  been  established  by  pro¬ 
per  and  sufficient  evidence,  our  faith  ought,  not  to  be 
shaken  by  every  objection  which  we  may  not  be 
able  to  solve.  To  admit  this,  would  be  to  plunge 
into  skepticism  on  all  subjects,  for  what  truth  is  there 
to  which  some  objection  may  not  be  raised  that  no 
man  can  fully  answer?  Even  the  clearest  truths  in 
science  are  not  exempt  from  objections  of  this  sort. 
It  must  be  so,  as  long  as  our  minds  are  so  limited 
and  the  extent  of  human  knowledge  so  narrow.  That 
man  judges  incorrectly  who  supposes  that  when  he 
has  found  out  some  objection  to  Christianity  which 
cannot  be  satisfactorily  answered,  he  has  gained  a 
victory.  There  are  indeed  objections  which  relate 
to  the  essence  of  propositions,  which,  if  sustained,  do 
overthrow  the  evidence;  but  there  are  other  nume* 

*  Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire,  c.  xv,  and  xvi. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


93 


rous  objections  which  leave  the  substantial  evidence 
undisturbed.  Concerning  these  I  speak  when  I  say 
that  objections,  though  not  admitting  of  an  answer, 
should  not  be  permitted  to  unsettle  our  faith. 

Let  us  now  proceed  to  the  examination  of  the  tes¬ 
timony  for  the  miracles  recorded  in  the  gospel.  In 
this  discussion  we  shall  take  it  for  granted,  that  such 
a  person  as  Jesus  Christ  lived  in  Judea  about  the 
time  mentioned  by  the  evangelists,  that  he  inculcated 
a  pure  and  sublime  morality,  lived  a  virtuous  and 
unblamable  life,  and  was  put  to  death  by  Pontius 
Pilate  at  the  instigation  of  the  Jewish  rulers;  that 
his  apostles  went  forth  into  various  countries  preach¬ 
ing  to  the  people,  and  declaring  that  this  crucified 
Jesus  was  a  person  sent  from  God  for  the  salvation 
of  the  world,  and  that  many  were  induced  to  connect 
themselves  with  the  Christian  church.  These  facts 
not  being  of  a  miraculous  nature,  and  it  being  neces¬ 
sary  to  suppose  some  such  events,  deists  have  com¬ 
monly  been  disposed  to  admit  them.  But  Volney 
and  some  others,  have  pretended  that  such  a  person 
as  Jesus  Christ  never  existed,  that  this  is  the  name 
of  one  of  the  celestial  luminaries,  and  that  the  gospel 
history  is  an  allegory.  Such  visionary  theories  do 
not  deserve  a  serious  answer:  they  are  subversive  of 
all  historical  truth,  and  have  not  a  shadow  of  evi¬ 
dence.  They  may  be  well  left,  to  sink  by  the  weight 
of  their  own  extravagance.  Volney,  however,  has 
received  a  learned  answer  from  a  gentleman*  who 
has  met  him  on  his  own  ground,  and  being  as  much 
attached  to  astronomical  allegories  as  the  French¬ 
man,  has  vanquished  him  with  his  own  weapons. 

In  the  examination  of  written  testimony,  the  first 
thing  requisite  is  to  prove  the  authenticity  of  the 
document  in  which  it  is  recorded.  The  evidence  on 
which  we  depend  for  the  truth  of  the  miracles  per¬ 
formed  by  Jesus  Christ  and  by  his  apostles,  is  con¬ 
tained  in  the  New  Testament.  Here  we  have  four 
distinct  narratives  of  the  life,  miracles,  death,  resur¬ 
rection,  and  ascension  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth;  and  also 

*  Mr.  Roberts. 


94 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


a  history  of  the  acts  and  sufferings  of  the  apostles  in 
preaching  the  gospel  and  laying  the  foundation  of 
the  first  Christian  churches,  after  the  resurrection  and 
ascension  of  their  Master.  We  have  also  in  this 
collection  of  writings  a  number  of  epistles  addressed 
to  the  church  in  general,  to  particular  churches,  and 
to  individuals.  These,  with  a  book  of  prophecy,  com¬ 
pose  the  volume  called  the  New  Testament. 

These  books  are  certainly  not  of  recent  origin ;  for 
there  are  extant  copies  of  the  New  Testament  in  the 
original  Greek,  which  are,  at  the  least,  twelve  hun¬ 
dred  years  old.  And  before  the  time  when  these 
manuscripts  were  penned,  we  have  in  other  books 
numerous  testimonies  to  the  existence  of  the  Chris¬ 
tian  Scriptures.  They  are  not  only  mentioned  but 
quoted,  expounded  and  harmonized,  so  that  if  every 
copy  of  the  New  Testament  had  been  lost,  a  large 
portion  of  it  might  be  recovered  by  means  of  the 
numerous  quotations  in  the  early  Christian  writers. 
Besides,  there  are  extant  versions  of  the  New  Testa¬ 
ment  into  several  languages  made  at  a  very  early 
period.  By  these  means  We  are  able  to  trace  these 
writings  up  to  the  time  in  which  the  apostles  lived. 

There  is  also  ample  proof,  not  only  from  Christian 
but  heathen  authors,  that  a  society  calling  themselves 
Christians  existed  as  early  as  the  reign  of  Nero  who 
was  contemporary  with  the  apostles.  It  is  evident, 
from  the  necessity  of  the  case,  that  some  such  ac¬ 
counts  as  those  contained  in  the  gospels  must  have 
been  received  as  true  from  the  first  existence  of  the 
Christian  church.  Unless  it  had  been  preached  and 
believed  that  Christ  was  a  divine  Teacher  and  per¬ 
formed  extraordinary  works  in  attestation  of  his  mis¬ 
sion,  how  is  it  possible  that  such  a  society  could  have 
been  formed?  To  suppose  such  a  thing  would  be 
to  conceive  of  a  superstructure  without  a  foundation. 
The  resurrection  of  Christ  from  the  dead  must  have 
been  an  article  of  the  faith  of  Christians,  from  their 
very  origin;  for  it  is  the  corner  stone  of  the  whole 
edifice.  Take  the  belief  of  this  away  and  the  Chris¬ 
tian  system  has  no  existence.  There  are  also  some 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


95 


external  institutions  peculiar  to  Christianity,  which 
we  must  suppose  to  he  coeval  with  the  formation 
of  the  society,  for  they  are  the  badges  of  the  Chris¬ 
tian  profession,  and  constitute  a  part,  of  their  worship. 
I  refer  to  baptism  and  the  eucharist.  To  suppose 
..that  in  some  way  Christianity  first  existed,  and  after 
wards  received  these  articles  of  faith  and  these  insti¬ 
tutions  of  worship,  is  too  improbable  to  be  admitted 
by  any  impartial  man.  It  would  be  to  suppose  that 
a  religious  society  existed  without  any  principles,  or 
that  they  rejected  their  original  principles  and  adopt¬ 
ed  new  ones;  and  that  they  who  imposed  these  upon 
them,  had  the  address  to  persuade  them,  that  they 
had  always  belonged  to  their  system; — than  which 
it  is  not  easy  to  conceive  any  thing  more  improba¬ 
ble.  Let  us  for  a  moment  attempt  to  imagine,  that 
previously  to  the  publication  of  the  gospels,  the 
Christian  church  had  among  them  no  report  of  the 
miracles,  and  no  account  of  the  institutions,  recorded 
in  these  books.  When  they  opened  them,  they  would 
read  that  their  society  was  founded  on  the  belief  of 
the  resurrection  of  Jesus,  and  that  baptism  and  the 
eucharist  were  instituted  by  him  before  he  left  the 
world,  and  had  existed  among  them  ever  since.  No¬ 
thing  can  be  more  evident  than  that  the  substance  of 
what  is  contained  in  the  gospels,  was  believed  and 
practised  by  Christians  from  the  commencement  of 
the  society. 

As  these  books  have  come  down  to  us  under  the 
names  of  certain  apostles  and  disciples  of  Jesus 
Christ,  so  they  were  ascribed  to  the  same  persons 
from  the  earliest  mention  of  them.  It  is  by  the 
ancient  Fathers  spoken  of  as  a  fact  universally  be¬ 
lieved  among  Christians,  and  contradicted  by  nobody. 
And  we  must  not  suppose  that  in  the  first  ages  of 
Christianity  there  was  little  care  or  discrimination 
exercised,  in  ascertaining  the  true  authors  and  genu¬ 
ine  character  of  the  books  in  circulation.  The  very 
reverse  is  the  fact.  The  most  diligent  inquiries  were 
instituted  into  matters  of  this  kind.  Other  books 
were  published  in  the  name  of  the  apostles,  profess- 


) 


96 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


in g  to  give  an  account  of  Jesus  Christ,  which  were 
not  genuine.  The  distinction  between  the  books  of 
the  New  Testament  and  all  others  of  every  class,  was 
as  clearly  marked  in  the  earliest  ages  as  it  has  ever 
been  since.  The  writings  of  the  apostles  were  held 
in  great  veneration,  were  received  by  the  churches 
all  over  the'  world,  as  the  rule  of  their  faith  and  direc¬ 
tory  of  their  lives,  and  publicly  read  at  their  meet¬ 
ings  for  the  instruction  of  the  people.  When  any 
controversy  arose  they  were  appealed  to  as  an  au¬ 
thoritative  standard.  As  soon  as  published,  they  were 
so  widely  scattered  and  so  carefully  guarded,  that  no 
persons  had  it  in  their  power  to  make  any  alteration 
in  them. 

The  style  and  dialect  in  which  these  books  are 
written  furnishes  an  evidence  of  their  authenticity, 
of  a  peculiar  kind.  It  does  not  indeed  ascertain  the 
persons  of  the  writers,  but  proves  that  they  must  have 
been  exactly  in  the  circumstances  of  those  to  whom 
these  books  have  been  uniformly  ascribed.  The 
words  are  Greek  but  the  idiom  is  in  Hebrew,  or 
rather  Syro-Chaldaic,  the  vernacular  tongue  of  Judea 
in  the  time  of  Christ  and  his  apostles.  This  is  a 
peculiarity  which  none  could  counterfeit,  and  which 
demonstrates  that  the  New  Testament  was  not  com¬ 
posed  by  men  of  a  different  country  and  age  from, 
those  in  which  the  apostles  lived. 

In  the  New  Testament  there  are  numerous  refer¬ 
ences  to  rivers,  mountains,  seas,  cities,  and  countries, 
which  none  but  a  person  well  acquainted  with  the 
geography  of  Judea  and  the  neighbouring  countries 
could  have  made,  without  falling  into  innumerable 
errors.  There  is  moreover  incidental  mention  of 
persons  and  facts  known  from  other  authorities  to 
have  existed,  and  frequent  allusions  to  manners  and 
customs  peculiar  to  the  Jews.  < 

From  all  these  considerations,  it  ought  to  be  admit¬ 
ted  without  dispute,  that  these  are  indeed  the  writ¬ 
ings  of  the  apostles,  and  of  those  particular  persons 
to  whom  they  are  ascribed.  It  would  not  however 
destroy  their  credibility  even  if  other  persons  had 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


97 


written  them,  since  they  were  certainly  composed  in 
that  age  and  were  received  by  the  whole  body  of 
Christians.  But  what  imaginable  reason  is  there 
for  doubting  the  genuineness  of  these  books,?  What 
persons  were  so  likely  to  write  books  to  guide  the 
faith  of  the  church  as  the  apostles  ?  If  they  did  not 
write  them  who  would?  And  why  would  they 
give  the  credit  of  them  to  others  ?  But  their  uni¬ 
versal  reception  without  opposition  or  contradiction 
should  silence  every  cavil.  The  persons  who  lived 
at  this  time  knew  the  apostles,  and  were  deeply  in¬ 
terested  in  the  subject,  and  they  are  the  proper  judges 
of  this  question.  They  have  decided  it  unanimously, 
as  it  relates  to  the  historical  books  of  the  New  Tes¬ 
tament.  From  them  the  testimony  has  come  down, 
through  all  succeeding  ages,  without  chasm.  Even 
heathen  writers  and  heretics  are  witnesses  that  the 
gospels  were  written  by  the  persons  whose  names 
they  bear.* 

In  other  cases  we  usually  possess  no  other  evi¬ 
dence  of  the  genuineness  of  the  most  valued  writings 
of  antiquity,  except  the  opinion  of  contemporaries 
handed  down  by  uncontradicted  tradition.  How 
soon  would  Homer  be  deprived  of  his  glory,  if  such 
evidence  was  insisted  on  as  is  required  for  the  genu¬ 
ineness  of  the  New  Testament  ?  Certainly,  as  it 
respects  evidences  of  genuineness,  no  books  of  anti¬ 
quity  stand  upon  a  level  with  the  books  of  the  New 
Testament.  The  works  of  the  Greek  and  Latin  his¬ 
torians  and  poets  have  no  such  evidence  of  being  the 
writings  of  the  persons  whose  names  they  bear,  as 
the  writings  of  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John. 
For  we  have  the  testimony,  not  merely  of  individu¬ 
als,  but  of  numerous  societies,  widely  scattered  over 
the  world.  We  have  internal  evidence  of  a  kind 
which  cannot  be  counterfeited.  We  have,  in  short, 
every  species  of  evidence  of  which  the  case  admits. 
It  may  therefore  be  considered  as  an  established  fact, 
that  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  are  the  genuine 
productions  of  the  apostles,  and  consequently  contain 

*  See  Lardner’s  Heathen  Testimonies. 

9 


98 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


their  testimony  to  the  miracles  of  Jesus  Christ,  and 
also  to  those  miracles  which  in  his  name  they  per  > 
formed  after  his  ascension. 

It  is  also  certain  that  the  books  of  the  New  Testa¬ 
ment  have  not  undergone  any  material  change  since 
they  were  written;  for  there  is  a  general  agreement 
in  all  copies,  in  all  the  versions,  and  in  all  the  quo¬ 
tations.  There  are,  it  is  true,  small  discrepancies, 
which  have  occurred  through  the  ignorance  or  care¬ 
lessness  of  transcribers,  but  not  more  than  might 
naturally  be  expected.  There  is  no  ancient  book 
which  has  come  down  to  us  so  entire  as  the  Scrip¬ 
tures,  and  which  is  accompanied  by  so  many  means 
of  correcting  an  erroneous  reading  where  it  has  oc¬ 
curred.  This  representation  may  appear  surprising 
to  those  who  have  heard  of  the  vast  multitude  of 
various  readings  which  learned  critics  have  collected 
from  a  collation  of  the  manuscripts;  but  it  ought  to 
be  understood  by  all  who  have  ever  heard  of  these 
discrepancies,  that  not  one  in  a  thousand  is  of  the 
least  consequence;  that  a  great  majority  of  them  are 
merely  differences  in  orthography,  in  the  collocation 
of  words,  or  in  the  use  of  words  perfectly  synony¬ 
mous,  by  which  the  sense  is  not  in  the  least  affected. 
A  cursory  reader  would  find  as  little  difference  in  the 
various  manuscripts  of  the  New  Testament,  as  in  the 
different  printed  editions  of  the  English  version. 

Having  established  the  authenticity  of  the  record 
which  contains  the  testimony,  we  shall  next  proceed 
to  consider  its  credibility. 

I.  Many  of  the  facts  related  in  the  gospel  are 
undoubtedly  of  a  miraculous  nature.  It  is  declared 
that  Jesus  Christ,  in  several  instances,  raised  the 
dead.  In  one  case  the  person  had  been  dead  four 
days,  so  that  the  body  began  to  be  offensive  to.  the 
smell.  In  every  case,  this  miracle  was  wrought  in 
stantly  and  without  any  other  means  than  speaking 
a  word.  It  is  declared  that  he  healed  multitudes  ot 
the  most  inveterate  and  incurable  diseases;  that  he 
gave  sight  to  the  blind,  hearing  to  the  deaf,  speech 
to  the  dumb,  and  active  limbs  to  the  withered  and 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


99 


the  maimed;  that  he  delivered  those  who  were  furi¬ 
ous  and  unmanageable  by  reason  of  the  possession  of 
demons;  that  on  different  occasions  he  fed  thousands 
of  people  with  a  few  loaves  and  fishes  until  they 
were  satisfied,  and  that  the  fragments  which  were 
gathered  up  were  much  greater  in  quantity  than  the 
original  materials ;  that  he  walked  upon  the  sea  and 
with  a  word  allayed  the  raging  storm  and  produced 
a  great  calm.  And  finally,  it  is  repeatedly  and  sol¬ 
emnly  declared  by  all  the  witnesses,  that  Jesus  Christ, 
after  being  crucified  and  after  having  continued  in 
the  sepulchre  three  days,  rose  from  the  dead,  and 
after  showing  himself  frequently  to  his  disciples, 
ascended  to  heaven  in  their  presence. 

That  all  these  were  real  miracles,  none  can  for  a 
moment  doubt.  It  is  true,  we  do  not  know  all  the 
powers  of  nature ;  but  we  do  know,  as  certainly  as 
we  know  any  thing,  that  such  works  as  these  could 
not  be  performed  but  by  the  immediate  power  of 
God.  The  same  remark  may  be  extended  to  the 
miracles  wrought  by  the  apostles  in  the  name  of  the 
Lord  Jesus,  and  especially  to  that  stupendous  miracle 
on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  when  the  Holy  Ghost  de¬ 
scended  on  the  apostles  invisible  form,  and  conferred 
on  them  the  gift  of  tongues  and  other  extraordinary 
endowments.  All  must  admit,  that  if  these  events 
ever  occurred,  then  there  have  existed  undoubted 
miracles. 

II.  The  miracles  of  Jesus  were  performed,  for  the 
most  part,  in  an  open  and  public  manner,  in  the  pre¬ 
sence  of  multitudes  of  witnesses,  under  the  inspection 
of  learned  and  malignant  enemies,  in  a  great  variety 
of  circumstances,  and  for  several  years  in  succession. 
There  was  here  no  room  for  trick,' sleight  of  hand, 
illusion  of  the  senses,  or  any  thing  else  which  could 
impose  on  the  spectators.  This  circumstance  is  im¬ 
portant,  because  it  proves  to  a  certainty,  that  the 
apostles  themselves  could  not  be  deluded  and  deceived 
in  the  testimony  which  they  have  given.  To  suppose 
that  they  could  think  that  -they  saw  such  miracles 
every  day  for  years,  and  yet  be  deceived,  would  be 


100  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

nearly  as  extravagant  a  supposition,  as  that  we  were 
deceived  in  all  that  we  ever  experienced  in  our  whole 
lives. 

III.  The  character  of  the  miracles  recorded  in  the 
gospels  ought  to  be.carefully  observed.  They  were 
all  worthy  of  the  majesty,  justice,  and  benevolence 
of  the  Son  of  God.  They  are  characterized  by  dig¬ 
nity,  propriety,  and  kindness.  -  Most  of  them  indeed 
were  acts  of  tender  compassion  to  the  afflicted.  Al¬ 
though  so  many  miracles  were  performed,  in  so  great 
a  variety  of  circumstances,  yet  there  is  nothing  ludi¬ 
crous,  puerile,  or  vindictive  in  any  of  them.  Christ 
never  exerted  his  power  to  gratify  the  curiosity  of 
any,  or  to  supply  his  own  daily  wants.  He  made 
no  ostentatious  display  of  his  wonderful  power,  and 
never  used  it  to  acquire  wealth  and  influence.  While 
he  fed  hungry  multitudes  by  a  miracle,  he  submitted 
to  hunger  and  want  himself;  while  he  could  com¬ 
mand  all  nature,  he  remained  in  poverty,  not  having 
so  much  as  a  home  of  any  kind,  to  which  he  could 
retire  to  find  repose.  Although  he  was  rejected  and 
ill-treated  by  the  Jews,  he  never  refused  to  relieve 
any  who  sincerely  sought  his  aid.  His  life,  ip  conse¬ 
quence  of  the  multitudes  who  flocked  to  him,  was 
fatiguing,  and  on  many  accounts  unpleasant,  but  he 
never  grew  weary  in  doing  good. 

Let  any  man  compare  the  narrative  of  the  mira¬ 
cles  of  Christ,  contained  in  the  genuine  gospels,  with 
those  fictitious  accounts  which  may  be  found  in  the 
apocryphal  and  spurious  gospels  still  extant,  and  he 
will  be  struck  with  the  remarkable  contrast  between 
them.  The  same  result  will  be  the  consequence  of 
a  comparison  of  the  miracles  of  Christ  with  those 
ascribed  to  Mohammed  by  his  followers,  or  those 
contained  in  the  legends  of  the  church  of  llome.  I 
know  not  how  any  impartial  man  can  read  atten¬ 
tively  the  account  of  the  miracles  recorded  in  the 
gospels,  and  not  be  convinced,  from  the  very  nature 
and  circumstances  of  the  facts  reported,  that  they 
were  real. 

IV,  There  are  no  signs  of  fraud  or  imposture  to 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


101 


be  discovered  in  the  record  itself.  There  is,  on  the 
contrary,  every  indication  of  truth,  honesty,  and  good 
intention  in  the  writers.  Although  they  differ  from 
each  other  in  style  and  manner  so  much  that  it  is 
evident  the  same  person  did  not  compose  the  four 
gospels;  yet  there  is  a  character  of  style  which  be 
longs  to  the  whole  of  them,  and  which  is  without  a 
parallel  among  any  writers  but  the  penmen  of  the 
sacred  Scriptures.  It  is  an  apparent  exemption  from 
the  passions  and  frailties  of  human  nature.  The 
most  stupendous  mHacles  are  related  without  one 
exclamation  of  wonder  from  the  historian,  and  with¬ 
out  the  least  appearance  of  a  desire  to  excite  the 
wonder  of  the  reader. 

The  character  of  Christ  is  drawn  in  no  other  way 
than  by  simply  telling  what  he  did  and  said.  There 
is  no  portraying  of  character  in  the  way  of  general 
description,  or  by  using  strong  epithets  to  set  him 
forth.  There  is  perhaps  no  such  thing  in  the  gospel 
as  an  expression  of  admiration  of  any  discourse  or 
action,  on  the  part  of  the  evangelists.  If  they  relate 
such  things,  they  are  the  words  of  others  which  they 
faithfully  set  down.  When  they  describe  the  suffer¬ 
ings  of  Christ,  they  never  fall,  as  men  usually  do,  into 
pathetic  declamation.  They  are  never  carried  away 
from  tfieir  simple  course  by  the  power  of  sympathy. 
The  facts  are  related  as  though  the  writer  felt  no¬ 
thing  but  the  strong  purpose  of  declaring  the  truth, 
without  giving  any  colouring  whatever  to  the  facts. 
Neither  do  they  indulge  themselves  in  those  vehe¬ 
ment  expressions  of  indignation  against  the  enemies 
of  Christ,  which  we  should  naturally  have  expected. 
They  never  give  utterance  to  a  harsh  expression 
against  any  one.  They  relate  the  treachery  of  Judas 
with  the  same  unaffected  simplicity  as  if  they  had  no 
feelings  relative  to  his  base  conduct. 

But  there  is  something  which  exhibits  the  true 
character  of  the  writers  in  a  light  still  stronger.  It 
is  the  manner  in  which  they  speak  of  themselves. 
Few  men  can  write  much  concerning  themselves 
without  betraying  the  strength  of  self-love.  Weak 

9*  . 


102  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

men,  when  they  speak  on  this  topic,  are  commonly 
disgusting:  and  even  when  persons  seem  willing  to 
let  the  truth  he  known,  there  is  usually  an  effort  to 
seek  compensation  in  something  for  every  sacrifice 
which  they  make  of  reputation.  But  we  may  chal¬ 
lenge  any  one  to  designate  any  instance  in  which  the 
least  indication  of  this  moral  weakness  has  been 
given  by  the  evangelists.  They  speak  of  themselves 
and  their  companions,  with  the  same  candour  which 
characterizes  their  narrative  in  regard  to  others. 
They  describe  in  the  most  artl^s  manner,  the  low¬ 
ness  of  their  origin,  the  meanness  of  their  occupation, 
the  grossness  of  their  ignorance,  the  inveteracy  of 
their  prejudices,* their  childish  contentions  for  supe¬ 
riority,  their  cowardice  in  the  hour  of  danger,  the 
fatal  apostacy  of  one,  and  the  temporary  delinquen¬ 
cy  of  another  of  their  number.  If  any  person  sup¬ 
poses  that  it  is  an  easy  thing  to  write  as  the  evange¬ 
lists  have  done,  he  must  have  attended  very  little  to 
the  subject.  It  cannot  be  imitated  even  now  when 
the  model  is  fully  before  us.  That  these  unlearned 
men  should  be  able  to  write  books  at  all  with  pro¬ 
priety,  is  wonderful.  Few  fishermen  or  mechanics, 
confined  all  their  lives  to  laborious  occupations  and 
untutored  in  the  art  of  composition,  could  produce, 
without  committing  great  faults,  a  narrative  of  their 
own  lives.  But  that  men  of  such  an  education  should 
possess  such  self-command  and  self-denial,  as  is  ma¬ 
nifest  in  these  compositions,  cannot  be  accounted  for 
on  common  principles. 

That,  however,  which  deserves  our  special  atten¬ 
tion,  is  the  absence  of  all  appearance  of  ill-design.  I 
should  like  to  ask  a  candid  infidel  to  point  out  in  the 
gospel,  some  fact  or  speech,  which  in  the  remotest 
degree  tends  to  prove  that  the  writers  had  a  bad  end 
in  view.  I  need  not  say  that  he  could  find  nothing 
of  the  kind.  Then  upon  his  hypothesis,  we  have  this 
extraordinary  fact,  that  four  books,  written  by  impos¬ 
tors  who  have  imposed  on  the  world  a  series  of  false¬ 
hoods,  do  in  no  part  of  them  betray  the  least  appear¬ 
ance  of  ill-design  or  sinister  purpose.  Certainly  no 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY.  103 

other  books  written  by  deceivers  possess  the  same 
characteristics. 

We  have  some  instances  of  men  of  learning  and 
piety  manifesting  uncommon  candour,  in  the  accounts 
which  they  have  left  of  their  own  errors,  prejudices, 
and  faults;  but  in  all  of  them  you  perceive  the  sem¬ 
blance,  if  not  reality,  of  human  frailty.  These  works, 
however,  are  very  valuable.  Some  eminent  infidels 
also  have  come  forward  before  the  world,  with  con¬ 
fessions  and  narratives  of  their  lives,  and  even  of 
their  secret  crimes.  None  has  made  himself  more 
conspicuous  in  this  way  than  J.  J.  Rousseau,  who 
professes  to  exhibit  to  the  world  a  full  confession  of 
his  faults,  during  a  period  of  many  years.  And  to 
do  him  justice,  he  has  exposed  to  view  moral  turpi¬ 
tude  enough  to  make,  if  it  were  possible,  a  demon 
blush.  But  this  infatuated  man  gloried  in  his  shame, 
and  declared  it  to  be  his  purpose,  when  called  before 
the  tribunal  of  heaven,  to  appear  with  his  book  in 
hand  and  present  it  to  his  judge  as  his  confession  and 
apology.  Through  the  transparent  covering  of  affec¬ 
tation,  we  may  observe  the  most  disgusting  pride  and 
arrogance.  While  common  sense  and  decency  are 
outraged  by  a  needless  confession  of  deeds  which 
ought  not  to  be  once  named,  he  is  so  far  from  exhib¬ 
iting  any  thing  of  the  character  of  a  true  penitent, 
that  he  rather  appears  as  the  shameless  apologist  of 
vice.  By  his  unreserved  disclosures  he  aspired  to  a 
new  sort  of  reputation  and  glory.  Perhaps  there  is 
not,  in  any  language,  a  composition  more  strongly 
marked  with  pride  and  presumption.  His  confes¬ 
sions  were  manifestly  made  in  a  confidence  of  the 
corruption  of  mankind,  from  whom  he  expected 
much  applause  for  his  candour,  and  small  censure  for 
his  vices;  but  as  he  has  appealed  to  another  tribunal, 
we  may  be  permitted  to  doubt  whether  he  will  there 
find  as  much  applause,  and  as  slight  condemnation, 
as  he  affected  to  expect.  Between  such  impious 
confessions  as  these,  and  the  simple,  humble,  and 
sober  statements  of  the  evangelists,  there  can  be  no 
comparison. 


104  EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 

There  is  only  one  thing  in  the  style  of  the  apostles, 
which  I  wish  to  bring  into  view.  In  all  the  detailed 
narratives  which  they  have  given  of  Jesus  Christ,  no 
allusion  is  ever  made  to  his  personal  appearance. 
We  are  as  much  unacquainted  with  his  stature,  his 
aspect,  his  complexion,  his  gait  and  manner,  as  if  the 
gospel  had  never  been  written.  There  is  profound 
wisdom  in  this  silence ;  yet  I  doubt  whether  any 
writers,  following  merely  the  impulse  of  their  own 
feelings,  would  have  avoided  every  allusion  to  this 
subject. 

V.  There  is  no  just  ground  of  objection  to  the  tes¬ 
timony  on  account  of  the  paucity  of  the  witnesses. 
In  regard  to  most  facts  handed  down  to  us  by  authen¬ 
tic  history,  it  is  seldom  that  we  have  more  than  two 
or  three  historians  testifying  the  same  things;  and  in 
many  cases  we  receive  the  testimony  of  one-  as  suffi¬ 
cient,  if  all  the  circumstances  of  the  fact  corroborate 
his  narrative.  But  here  we  have  four  distinct  and 
independent  witnesses,  who  were  perfectly  acquaint¬ 
ed  with  the  fact  which  they  relate.  T wo  of  these, 
Matthew  and  John,  were  of  the  number  of  the  twelve 
who  accompanied  Jesus  wherever  he  went,  and  saw 
from  day  to  day  the  works  which  he  performed. 
Mark  and  Luke  might  also  have  been  eye-witnesses. 
Many  think  that  they  were'  of  the  number  of  the 
seventy  disciples  sent  out  by  Christ  to  preach;  but 
even  if  they  were  not,  they  may  have  been  his  fol¬ 
lowers,  and  often  present  in  Jerusalem  and  other 
places  where  he  performed  his  miracles.  It  is  not 
necessary,  however,  to  resort  to  either  of  these  sup¬ 
positions.  -  They  were  contemporaries,  early  disci¬ 
ples,  constant  companions  of  the  apostles,  and  travel¬ 
led  much  among  the  churches.  Mark  was  at  first 
the  companion  of  Paul  and  Barnabas,  and  afterwards 
attached  himself  to  Peter,  from  whose  preaching,  ac¬ 
cording  to  the  universal  tradition  of  the  early  Fathers, 
he  composed  his  gospel.  Luke  was  chosen  by  the 
churches  in  Asia  to  accompany  Paul  in  his  labours, 
and  was  almost  constantly  with  him  until  his  first 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  105 

* 

imprisonment  at  Rome ;  at  which  time  his  history  of 
the  life  and  labours  of  that  apostle  terminates. 

Besides  these  four  evangelists,  who  have  profes 
sedly  written  an  account  of  the  miracles  of  Jesus 
Christ,  we  have  the  incidental  testimony  of  those 
apostles  who  wrote  the  epistles,  especially  of  Paul. 
It  is  true,  Paul  was  not  one  of  the  twelve  apostles 
who  accompanied  Christ  on  earth,  but  he  became  an 
apostle  under  circumstances  which  rendered  his  tes¬ 
timony  as  strong  as  that  of  any  other  witness.  He 
informs  us  that  he  was  met  by  Jesus  near  to  Damas¬ 
cus,  when  he  was  “breathing  out  threatening  and 
slaughter”  against  the  disciples  of  Christ;  that  he 
appeared  to  him  in  the  midst  of  a  resplendent  light, 
and  spoke  to  him.  From  that  moment  he  became 
his  devoted  follower,  and  the  most  laborious  and  suc¬ 
cessful  preacher  of  the  gospel.  He  abandoned  the 
most  flattering  worldly  prospects  which  any  young 
man  in  the  Jewish  nation  could  have.  He  possessed 
genius,  learning,  an  unblemished  character  for  reli¬ 
gion  and  morality;  was  in  high  favour  with  the  chief 
men  of  his  nation,  and  seems  to  have  been  more  zeal¬ 
ous  than  any  other  individual  to  extirpate  Christian¬ 
ity.  How  can  it  be  accounted  for,  that  he  should 
suddenly  become  a  Christian,  unless  he  did  indeed 
see  the  risen  Jesus?  Instead  of  bright  worldly  pros¬ 
pects  which  he  had  before,  he  was  now  subjected  to 
persecution  and  contempt  wherever  he  went.  The 
catalogue  of  only  a  part  of  his  sufferings,  which  he 
gives  in  one  of  his  epistles,  is  enough  to  appal  the 
stoutest  heart ;  yet  he  never  repented  of  his  becoming 
a  Christian,  but  continued  to  devote  all  his  energies 
to  the  promotion  of  the  gospel  as  long  as  he  lived. 
This  change,  in  a  person  of  Paul’s  character  and 
prospects,  will  never  be  accounted  for  upon  the  sup¬ 
position  of  imposture  or  enthusiasm.*  Here,  then, 
we  can  produce  what  deists  often  demand,  the  testi¬ 
mony  of  an  enemy;  not  of  one  who  was  uncon¬ 
vinced  by  the  evidence  of  Christianity,  which  would 


*  See  Lord  Lyttleton’s  Conversion  of  Paul. 


106 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


be  an  inconsistent  testimony  and  liable  to  great  ob¬ 
jections;  but  of  one  whose  mind  had  been  long  in¬ 
flamed  with  zeal  against  Christianity;  and  yet  by  the 
force  of  evidence  was  converted  to  be  a  zealous  dis¬ 
ciple,  and  retained  all  his  life  a  deep  and  unwavering 
conviction  of  the  truth  of  the  gospel.*  This  man, 
although  he  has  not  written  a  gospel,  has  given 
repeated  testimonies  to  the  truth  of  the  leading  facts 
which  are  now  in  question.  He  is  especially  one  of 
the  best  witnesses  on  the  subject  of  the  resurrection 
of  Christ ;  for  he  not  only  saw  and  conversed  with 
Jesus  after  his  ascension,  but  has  informed  us  of  some 
circumstances  of  great  importance  not  mentioned  by 
any  of  the  evangelists.  He  asserts  that  Christ  was 
seen  by  five  hundred  persons  at  one  time,  most  of 
whom  were  still  living  when  he  wrote.  If  there  had 
been  any  falsehood  in  this  declaration,  how  soon 
must  it  have  been  detected !  His  letters,  no  doubt, 
were  immediately  transcribed  and  conveyed  to  every 
part  of  the  church ;  and  how  easy  would  it  have  been 
to  prove  the  falsehood  of  such  a  declaration,  if  it  had 
not  been  a  fact !  But  almost  every  page  of  Paul’s 
writings  recognises  as  true  the  resurrection  of  Jesus 
Christ.  It  is  constantly  assumed  as  a  truth  most 
assuredly  believed  by  all  Christians.  It  is  the  great 
motive  to  exertion  and  source  of  consolation,  in  all 
his  epistles.  And  when  he  would  convince  certain 
heretics  of  the  absurdity  of  denying  the  resurrection 
of  the  body,  he  reduces  them  to  this  conclusion,  that 
“  if  the  dead  rise  not,  then  is  Christ  not  risen,”  which 
would  be  at  once  to  subvert  the  Christian  religion. 
His  appeal  to  the  common  assured  belief  of  Christians 
is  remarkably  strong  and  pertinent  to  our  purpose : 
“  If,”  says  he,  “  Christ  be  not  risen,  then  is  our  preach¬ 
ing  vain,  and  your  faith  is  also  vain.  Yea,  and  we 

*  There  is  a  remarkable  testimony  to  the  extraordinary  character 
and  works  of  Jesus  Christ,  in  Josephus,  which  has  been  rejected  as 
spurious  by  modern  critics;  not  for  want  of  external  evidence,  for  it 
is  found  in  all  the  oldest  and  best  manuscripts,  but  principally  be* 
cause  it  is  conceived  that  Josephus,  being-  a  Jew  and  a  Pharisee, 
never  could  have  given  such  a  testimony  in  favour  of  one  in  whom 
he  did  not  believe, 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  107 

are  found  false  witnesses  of  God;  because  we  have 
testified  of  God  that  he  raised  up  Christ,  whom  he 
raised  not  up,  if  so  be  that  the  dead  rise  not.”  Would 
any  man  in  his  senses  have  written  thus,  if  the  resur¬ 
rection  of  Christ  had  not  been  a  fundamental  article 
of  faith  among  Christians,  or  if  he  had  not  been  fully- 
persuaded  of  its  truth?  Had  Paul  been  an  impostor, 
would  he  have  dared  to  appeal  to  five  hundred 
persons,  most  of  whom  were  living,  for  the  truth  of 
what  he  knew  to  be  false?  How  easy  and  how 
certain  must  have  been  the  detection  of  an  imposture 
thus  conducted ! 

The  same  is  evident  from  the  epistles  of  the  other 
apostles,  and  from  the  Apocalypse. 

Now,  when  we  can  clearly  ascertain  what  any  per¬ 
sons  believed  in  relation  to  a  fact,  we  have  virtually 
their  testimony  to  that  fact;  because,  when  they  come 
forward  and  give  testimony  explicitly,  they  do  no 
more  than  express  the  conviction  of  their  own  minds. 
Certainly,  then,  if  we  can,  by  any  means,  ascertain 
what  the  primitive  Christians  believed  in  regard  to 
the  resurrection  of  Christ  and  other  miraculous  facts, 
we  are  in  possession  of  all  the  testimony  which  they 
could  give.*  This  is  an  important  point  as  it  relates 
to  the  number  of  witnesses.  Now,  that  all  Chris¬ 
tians,  from  the  beginning,  did  believe  in  the  facts 
recorded  in  the  gospels  and  epistles  of  the  apostles, 
we  have  the  strongest  possible  evidence.  It  is 
proved  incontestably  from  the  fact  of  their  becoming 
Christians;  for  how  could  they  be  Christians  with¬ 
out  faith  in  Christianity  ?  unless  any  one  will  be  so 
extravagant  as  to  believe,  that  not  only  the  apostles, 
but  all  their  converts,  were  wilful  deceivers.  It  is 
proved  also  from  the  manner  in  which  Christians  are 
addressed  by  the  apostles  in  all  their  epistles.  Sup¬ 
pose,  for  a  moment,  that  the  Corinthian  Church  had 
no  belief  in  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  when  they 
received  the  above  mentioned  epistle  from  Paul, 
would  they  not  have  considered  him  perfectly  in¬ 
sane?  But  the  universal  reception  of  the  gospels 

*  See  Dr.  Channing’s  Dudleian  Lecture. 


108  EVIDENCES  or  CHRISTIANITY. 

and  epistles,  by  all  Christian  churches  throughout 
the  world,  is  the  best  possible  evidence  that  they 
believed  what  they  contained.  These  books  were 
adopted  as  the  creed  and  guide  of  all  Christians. 
It  is  manifest,  therefore,  that  we  are  in  possession  of 
the  testimony  of  the  whole  primitive  church,  to  the 
truth  of  the  miracles  recorded  in  the  gospels.  Sup¬ 
pose  a  document  had  come  down  to  us,  containing  a 
profession  of  the  belief  of  every  person  who  embraced 
the  Christian  religion,  and  a  solemn  attestation  to 
the  facts  on  which  Christianity  is  founded,  would 
any  man  object  that  the  witnesses  were  too  few  ? 
The  fact  is,  that  we  have  substantially  this  whole 
body  of  testimony.  I  do  not  perceive,  that  its  force 
would  have  been  sensibly  greater  had  it  been  trans¬ 
mitted  to  us  with  all  the  formalities  just  mentioned. 
There  is,  therefore,  no  defect  in  the  number  of  wit¬ 
nesses.  If  every  one  of  the  twelve  apostles  had 
written  a  gospel,  and  a  hundred  other  persons  had 
done  the  same,  the  evidence  would  not  be  essentially 
improved.  We  should  have  no  more,  after  all,  than 
the  testimony  of  the'  whole  primitive  church,  which, 
as  has  been  proved,  we  possess  already.- 

VI.  The  credibility  of  the  testimony  is  not  im¬ 
paired  by  any  want  of  agreement  among  the  wit¬ 
nesses.  In  their  attestation  to  the  leading  facts  and 
to  the  doctrines  and  character  of  Christ,  they  are  per¬ 
fectly  harmonious.  The  selection  of  facts  by  the 
several  evangelists  is  different,  and  the  same  fact  is 
sometimes  related  more  circumstantially  by  one  than 
another;  but  there  is  no  inconsistency  between  them. 
In  their  general  character  and  prominent  features, 
there  is  a  beautiful  harmony  in  the  gospels.  There 
is  no  difference  which  can  effect,  in  the  judgment  of 
the  impartial,  the  credibility  of  the  testimony  which 
they  contain.  If  all  the  evangelists  had  recorded 
precisely  the  same  facts,  and  all  the  circumstances  in 
the  same  order,  the  gospels,  would  appear  to  have 
been  written  in  concert,  which  would  weaken  their 
testimony.  But  it  is  almost  demonstrable,  from  in¬ 
ternal  evidence,  that  the  evangelists,  with  the  excep- 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  109 

tion  of  John,  never  had  seen  each  other’s  productions 
before  they  wrote.  Their  agreement  therefore  ought 
to  have  the  effect  of  witnesses  examined  apart  from 
each  other;  and  their  discrepancies  serve  to  prove 
that  there  could  be  no  concerted  scheme  to  deceive ; 
for  in  that  case  every  appearance  of  this  kind  would 
have  been  carefully  removed. 

I  am  aware,  that  on  the  ground  of  supposed  con¬ 
tradictions  or  irreconcilable  discrepancies,  the  most 
formidable  attacks  have  been  made  on  Christianity. 
It  is  entirely  incompatible  with  the  narrow  limits  of 
this  essay  to  entei^into  a  consideration  of  the  various 
methods  which  have  been  adopted  for  harmonizing 
the  gospels,  and  removing  the  difficulties  which 
arise  from  their  variations.  I  can  only  make  a  few 
general  observations,  with  the  view  of  leading  the 
reader  to  the  proper  principles  of  solution. 

It  ought  to  be  kept  in  mind,  that  the  gospels  were 
written  almost  two  thousand  years  ago,  in  a  language 
not  now  spoken,  and  in  a  remote  country,  whose 
manners  and  customs  were  very  different  from  ours. 
In  all  such  cases,  there  will  be  obscurities  and  diffi¬ 
culties,  arising  entirely  from  the  imperfection  of  our 
knowledge. 

The  gospels  do  not  purport  to  be  regular  histories 
of  events,  arranged  in  exact,  chronological  order,  but 
a  selection  of  important  facts  out  of  a  much  greater 
number  left  unnoticed.  The  time  when,  or  the  place 
where,  these  facts  occurred,  is  of  no  consequence  to 
the  end  contemplated  by  the  evangelists.  In  their 
narratives,  therefore,  they  have  sometimes  pursued 
the  order  of  time ;  in  other  cases,  the  arrangement 
has  been  suggested  by  the  subject  previously  treated, 
or  by  some  other  circumstance. 

In  recording  a  miracle,  the  number  of  persons 
benefited  is  not  of  much  consequence;  the  miracle  is 
the  same,  whether  sight  be  restored  to  one  person  or 
two:  or  whether  demons  be  expelled  from  one  or 
many.  If  one  historian,  intent  on  recording  the  ex¬ 
traordinary  fact,  selects  the  case  of  one  person,  which 
might  in  some  respects  be  more  remarkable,  and 

10 


110 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


another  mentions  two,  there  is  no  contradiction.  If 
they  professed  to  give  an  accurate  account  of  the 
number  healed,  there  would  be  ground  for  this  ob¬ 
jection;  but  this  was  no  part  of  the  design  of  the 
evangelists. 

If  a  writer,  in  order  to  exhibit  the  skill  of  an  ocu¬ 
list,  should  mention  a  remarkable  instance  of  sight 
being  restored  to  a  person  who  had  been  long  blind, 
it  could  not  be  fairly  inferred  from  the  narrative  that 
no  person  received  the  same  benefit  at  that  time; 
and  if  another  person  should  give  a  distinct  account 
of  all  the  cases,  there  would  be  no  contradiction  be¬ 
tween  these  witnesses.  All  the  difference  is,  that 
one  selects  a  prominent  fact  out  of  many ;  the  other 
descends  to  all  particulars. 

There  is  no  source  of  difficulty  more  usual  than 
the  confounding  of  things  which  are  distinct.  The 
narratives  of  events  truly  distinct  may  have  so  strik¬ 
ing  a  similarity,  that  the  cursory  reader  will  be  apt 
to  confound  them.  It  has  been  remarked  that  if  the 
two  miracles  of  feeding  the  multitude  had  been  men¬ 
tioned  by  two  different  evangelists,  each  giving  an 
account  of  one  case,  it  would  have  been  supposed 
by  many  that  they  were  accounts  of  the  same  occur¬ 
rence,  and  that  the  evangelists  did  not  agree  in  their 
testimony;  but  in  this  case,  both  these  miracles  are 
distinctly  related  by  the  same  evangelist,  and  dis¬ 
tinctly  referred  to  by  Christ  in  his  conversation  with 
his  disciples.  This  confounding  of  distinct  things  is 
never  more  commonly  done,  than  when  a  fact  was 
attended  with  a  great  number  of  circumstances  and 
occurrences,  rapidly  succeeding  each  other,  and  the 
historian  mentions  only  a  few  out  of  many.  This 
remark  is  fully  verified  with  respect  to  Christ’s  resur¬ 
rection.  The  narrative  of  all  the  evangelists  is  very 
concise.  Few  particulars  are  mentioned;  and  yet 
from  the  nature  of  the  case,  there  must  have  been 
an  extraordinary  degree  of  agitation  among  the  dis¬ 
ciples;  a  great  running  from  one  part  of  Jerusalem 
to  another,  to  tell  the  news ;  and  a  frequent  passing 
to  and  from  the  sepulchre.  It  is  not  wonderful, 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


Ill 


therefore,  that,  as  each  evangelist  mentions  only  a 
few  of  the  accompanying  occurrences,  there  should 
seem,  at  first  view,  to  be  some  discrepancy  in  their 
accounts.  Companies  of  women  are  mentioned  by 
each,  and  it  is  hastily  taken  for  granted  that  they 
were  all  the  same;  and  the  objector  proceeds  on  the 
supposition,  that  these  women  all  arrived  at  the 
sepulchre  at  the  same  time,  and  that  they  continued 
together.  He  forgets  to  take  into  view,  that  the 
persons  who  might  agree  to  meet  at  the  sepulchre, 
probably  lodged  at  very  different  distances  from  the 
place,  and  allows  nothing  for  the  agitation  and  dis¬ 
traction  produced  by  the  reports  and  visions  of  this 
interesting  morning.  But  on  this,  as  on  several  other 
subjects,  we  are  indebted  to  the  enemies  of  revelation 
for  being  the  occasion  of  bringing  forward  able  men, 
who  have  shed  so  much  light  on  this  part  of  the 
gospel  history,  that  even  the  appearance  of  discre¬ 
pancy  is  entirely  removed.* 

The  genealogy  of  Jesus  Christ,  as  given  by  Mat¬ 
thew  and  Luke,  has  furnished  -  to  modern  infidels 
much  occasion  of  cavil ;  but  it  ought  to  be  sufficient 
to  silence  these  objectors  that  the  early  enemies  of 
Christianity  made  no  objections  on  this  ground.  If 
one  of  these  is  the  genealogy  of  Joseph  and  the  other 
of  Mary,  there  will  be  no  discrepancy  between  them. 
Why  it  was  proper  to  give  the  descent  of  Joseph  the 
husband  of  Mary,  it  is  not  now  necessary  to  inquire. 
But  on  this  whole  subject  I  would  remark,  that  we 
are  very  little  acquainted  with  the  plan  on  which 
genealogical  tables  were  constructed.  It  seems  to 
have  been  a  very  intricate  business,  and  it  is  not 
surprising  that  we  should  be  at  a  loss  to  elucidate 
every  difficulty.  Again,  it  is  highly  probable  that 
these  lists  were  taken  from  some  genealogical  tables 
of  the  tribe  and  family  of  the  persons  to  whom  they 
refer.  Every  family  must  have  had  access  to  such 
tables,  on  account  of  their  inheritance.  Public  tables 
of  acknowledged  authority  would  be  far  better  for 

*  See  West  on  the  Resurrection;  Townson;  Macknight;  Ditton, 
Sherlock,  &c. 


112 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


the  purpose  which  the  evangelists  had  in  view  than 
new  o.nes?  even  though  these  should  have  been  more 
full  and  accurate.  These  genealogies  had  no  other 
object  than  to  prove  lhat  Jesus  of  Nazareth  was  a 
lineal  descendant  of  David  and  Abraham;  which 
purpose  is  completely  answered  by  them;  and  there 
are  no  difficulties  which  may  not  be  accounted  for 
by  our  ignorance  of  the  subject. 

Finally,  it  may  be  admitted  that  some  slight  inac¬ 
curacies  have  crept  into  the  copies  of  the  New  Testa¬ 
ment,  through  the  carelessness  of  transcribers.  It  is 
impossible  for  men  to  write  the  whole  of  a  book 
without  making  some  mistakes ;  and  if  there  be  some 
small  discrepancies  in  the  gospels  with  respect  to 
names  and  numbers,  they  ought  to  be  attributed  to 
this  cause. 

VII.  The  witnesses  of  the  miracles  of  Christ  could 
have  had  no  conceivable  motive  for  propagating  an 
imposture.  That  they  were  not  themselves  deceived 
is  manifest  from  the  nature  of  the  facts,  and  from  the 
full  opportunity  which  they  had  of  examining  them. 
It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  if  the  miracles  recorded 
by  them  never  existed,  they  were  wilful  impostors. 
They  must  have  wickedly  combined  to  impose  upon 
the  world.  But  what  motives  could  have  influenced 
them  to  pursue  such  a  course  we  cannot  imagine ;  or 
how  men  of  low  condition  and  small  education  should 
have  ever  conceived  it  possible  to  deceive  the  world 
in  such  a  case  is.  equally  inconceivable.  These  men 
had  worldly  interests  which  it  was  natural  for  them 
to  regard:  but  every  thing  of  this  kind  was  fully  re¬ 
linquished.  They  engaged  in  an  enterprise  not  only 
dangerous,  but  attended  with  certain  and  immediate 
ruin  to  all  their  worldly  interests.  They  exposed 
themselves  to  the  indignation  of  all  authority,  and  to 
the  outrageous  fury  of  the  multitude.  They  must 
have  foreseen,  that  they  would  bring  down  upon 
themselves  the  vengeance  of  the  civil  and  ecclesias¬ 
tical  powers,  and  that  every  species  of  suffering 
awaited  them.  Their  leader  was  crucified,  and  what 
could  hey  expect  from  declaring  that  he  was  alive, 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


113 


and  had  performed  wonderful  miracles?  If  they 
could  have  entertained  any  hopes  of  exemption  from 
evils  so  apparent,  experience  must  soon  have  con¬ 
vinced  them  that  they  had  engaged  not  only  in  a 
wicked,  but  most  unprofitable  undertaking.  It  was 
not  long  after  they  began  their  testimony,  before 
they  were  obliged  to  endure  unrelenting  persecution 
from  Jews  and  Gentiles.  Could  they  have  been 
influenced  by  a  regard  to  fame?  What  renown  could 
they  expect  from  proclaiming  a  crucified  man  to  be 
their  master,  and  the  ground  of  all  their  hope  and 
confidence?  If  this  was  their  object,  why  did  they 
give  all  the  glory  to  another  who  was  dead  ?  But 
the  fact  is  that  instead  of  fame  they  met  with  infamy. 
No  name  was  ever  more  derided  and  hated  than  that 
of  Christian.  They  were  vilified  as  the  most  con¬ 
temptible  miscreants  that  ever  lived,  as  the  refuse 
and  offscouring  of  all  things,  as  the  pests  and  distur¬ 
bers  of  society,  and  the  enemies  of  the  gods.  They 
were  pursued  as  outlaws,  and  punished  for  no  other 
reason  but  because  they  acknowledged  themselves 
to  be  Christians.  Would  men  persevere  in  propaga¬ 
ting  an  imposture  for  such  fame  as  this?  It  cannot 
be  supposed  that  they  expected  their  compensation 
in  another  world;  for  the  supposition  is  that  they 
^were  wilful  impostors,  who  were  every  day  asserting, 
in  the  most  solemn  manner,  what  they  knew  to  be 
false.  It  would  be  just  as  reasonable  to  suppose  that 
the  murderer  or  highway  robber  is  influenced  in  the 
commission  of  his  atrocious  crimes,  by  the  hope  of  a 
future  reward. 

The  only  alternative  is  to  suppose  that  they  were 
fanatics,  as  it  is  knowti  that  men  under  the  govern¬ 
ment  of  enthusiasm  contemn  all  the  common  conside¬ 
rations  which  usually  influence  human  conduct,  and 
often  act  in  a  way  totally  unaccountable.  This  repre¬ 
sentation  of  enthusiasm  is  just,  but  it  will  .lot  answer 
the  purpose  for  which  it  is  sidduced.  Enthusiasts  are 
always  strongly  persuaded  of  the  truth  of  the  religion 
which  they  wish  to  propagate ;  but  these  men,  upon 
the  hypothesis  under  consideration,  knew  that  all 

10* 


114  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

which  they  said  was  false.  Enthusiasm  and  impos¬ 
ture  are  irreconcilable.  It  is  true  that  what  begins  in 
enthusiasm  may  end  in  imposture;  but  in  this  case 
the  imposture  must  have  been  the  beginning,  as  well 
as  the  end,  of  the  whole  business.  There  was  no 
room  for  enthusiasm;  all  was  imposture,  if  the  facts 
reported  were  not  true.  But  the  best  evidence  that 
the  evangelists  were  not  fanatics,  is  derived  from 
their  writings.  These  are  at  the  greatest  remove 
from  the  ravings  or  reveries  of  enthusiasm.  They 
are  the  most  simple,  grave,  and  dispassionate  narra¬ 
tives  that  ever  were  written.  The  writers  are  actu¬ 
ated  by  no  phrensy;  they  give  no  indication  of  a 
heated  imagination;  they  speak  uniformly  the  lan¬ 
guage  of  “  truth  and  soberness.” 

VIII.  But  if  we  could  persuade  ourselves,  that  the 
apostles  might  have  been  actuated  by  some  unknown 
and  inconceivable  motive,  to  forge  the  whole  account 
of  Christ’s  miracles,  and  were  impelled  by  some  un¬ 
accountable  phrensy  to  persevere  through  all  difficul¬ 
ties  and  sufferings  to  propagate  lies^  can  we  believe 
that  they  could  have  found  followers  in  the  very 
country,  and  in  the  very  city,  where  the  miracles 
were  stated  to  have  been  performed? 

When  these  accounts  of  stupendous  and  numer¬ 
ous  miracles  were  published  in  Jerusalem,  where  the 
apostles  began  their  testimony,  what  would  the  peo¬ 
ple  think?  Would  they  not  say,  “  These  men  bring 
strange  things  to  our  ears.  They  tell  us  of  wonders 
wrought  among  us,  of  which  we  have  never  before 
heard.  And  they  would  not  only  have  us  to  believo 
their  incredible  story,  but  forsake  all  that  we  have, 
abandon  our  friends,  and  relinquish  the  religion  of 
our  forefathers,  received  from  God :  and  not  only  so, 
but  bring  upon  ourselves  and  families  the  vengeance 
of  those  that  rule  over  us,  and  the  hatred  and  reproach 
of  all  men.”  Is  it  possible  to  believe  that  one  sane 
person  would  have  received  their  report  ? 

Besides,  the  priests  and  rulers  who  had  put  Jesus 
to  death,  were  deeply  interested  to  prevent  the  cir¬ 
culation  of  such  a  story ;  it  implicated  them  in  a  hor- 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  115 

rid  crime.  Would  they  not  have  exerted  themselves 
to  lay  open  the  forgery,  and  would  there  have  been 
the  least  difficulty  in  accomplishing  the  object,  if  the 
testimony  of  these  witnesses  had  been  false?  The 
places  of  many  of  the  miracles  are  recorded,  and  the 
names  of  the  persons  healed  or  raised  from  the  dead, 
are  mentioned.  It  was  only  one  or  two  miles  to  the 
dwelling  of  Lazarus;  how  easy  would  it  have  been 
to  prove  that  the  story  of  his  resurrection  was  a  false¬ 
hood,  had  it  not  been  a  fact!  Jerusalem,  and  indeed 
the  temple  itself,  were  the  scenes  of  many  of  the  mi¬ 
racles  ascribed  to  Christ.  As  he  spent  much  time  in 
that  city,  it  is  presumable  that  not  a  person  residing 
there  could  have  been  totally  ignorant  of  facts  which 
must  have  occupied  the  attention  and  excited  the 
curiosity  of  the  public.  An  imposture  like  this  could 
never  be  successful  in  such  circumstances.  The  pre¬ 
sence  of  an  interested,  inimical,  and  powerful  body 
of  men,  would  soon  have  put  down  every  attempt  at 
an  imposition  so  gross  and  groundless.  If  the  apos¬ 
tles  had  pretended  that  at  some  remote  period,  or  in 
some  remote  country,  a  man  had  performed  miracles, 
they  might  have  persuaded  some  weak  and  credu¬ 
lous  persons;  but  they  appealed  to  the  people  to 
whom  they  preached,  as  the  witnesses  of  what  they 
related.  No  more  than  a  few  weeks  had  elapsed 
after  the  death  of  Jesus,  before  this  testimony  was 
published  in  Jerusalem :  apd  notwithstanding  all  the 
opposition  of  those  in  authority,  it  was  received,  and 
multitudes  willingly  offered  themselves  as  the  disci¬ 
ples  of  him  whom  they  had  recently  crucified. 

IX.  The  last  particular  which  I  shall  mention,  to 
set  the  testimony  of  the  witnesses  to  the  miracles  of 
the  gospel  in  its  true  light,  is  that  there  is  no  counter 
testimony.  These  witnesses  have  never  been  con¬ 
fronted  and  contradicted  by  others.  Whatever  force 
or  probability  their  declarations  are  entitled  to,  from , 
the  circumstances  of  the  case  and  from  the  evidences 
which  we  .  possess  of  their  integrity  and  intelligence, 
suffers  no  deduction  on  account  of  other  persons 
giving  a  different  testimony. 


116 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


The  Jewish  priests  and  rulers  did  indeed  cause  a 
story  to  be  circulated  relative  to  the  dead  body  of 
Christ,  contrary  to  the  testimony  of  the  apostles  which 
has  been  handed  down  to  us  by  the  evangelists. 
They  hired  the  soldiers  to  report  that  Christ’s  disci¬ 
ples  had  come  by  night  and  stolen  the  body  while 
they  slept,  a  story  too  absurd  and  inconsistent  to  re¬ 
quire  a  moment’s  refutation.  But  as  the  body  was 
gone  out  of  their  possession,  they  could  not  perhaps 
have  invented  any  thing  more  plausible.  It  proved 
nothing,  however,  except  that  the  body  was  removed 
while  the  soldiers  slept,  and  for  aught  they  could 
testify,  might  have  risen  from  the  dead,  according  to 
the  testimony  of  the  apostles. 

Deists  sometimes  demand  the  testimony  of  the 
enemies  as  well  as  the  friends  of  Christianity.  To v 
which  I  would  reply,  that  the  silence  of  enemies  is 
all  that  can  reasonably  be  expected  from  them.  That 
they  should  come  forward  voluntarily  with  testimony 
in  favour  of  a:  religion  which,  through  prejudice  or 
worldly  policy,  they  opposed,  could  not  reasonably 
be  expected.  Since  they  would  have  contradicted 
these  facts  if  it  had  been  in  their  power,  their  not 
doing  so  furnishes  the  strongest  negative  evidence 
which  we  can  possess.  And  no  other  evidence  than 
that  which  is  negative  or  merely  incidental,  ought  to 
be  expected  from  the  enemies  of  the  gospel;  unless, 
like  Paul,  they  were  convinced  by  the  evidence  ex¬ 
hibited  to  them.  But  no  denial  of  the  reality  of  the 
miracles  of  Christ  has  reached  us  from  any  quarter. 
As  far  as  we  have  any  accounts,  there  is  no  reason 
to  think  that  they  were  ever  denied  by  his  most  im¬ 
placable  enemies ;  they  said  that  he  performed  his 
works  by  help  of  Beelzebub.  The  first  heathen  wri¬ 
ters  against  Christianity  did  not  dare  to  deny  Christ’^ 
miracles.  Neither  Celsus,  Porphyry,  Hierocles,  nor 
Julian,  pretend  that  these  facts  were  entirely  false, 
for  they  attempted  to  account  for  them.  The  Jewish 
rabbies,  in  the  Talmud,  acknowledge  these  miracles, 
and  pretend  that  they  were  wrought  by  magic,  or  by 
the  power  of  the  venerable  name  of  Jehovah,  called 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  117 

tetrcigrcimmaton,  which  they  ridiculously  pretended 
that  Jesus  stole  out  of  the  temple,  and  by  which  they 
say  he  performed  his  wonderful  works. 

From  what  has  been  said,  I  trust  it  is  sufficiently 
manifest  that  we  have  such  testimony  for  the  mira¬ 
cles  of  the  New  Testament,  as  will  render  them  cre¬ 
dible  in  the  view  of  all  impartial  persons.  We  have 
shown  that  the  miracles  recorded  are  real  miracles; 
that  they  were  performed  in  an  open  and  public 
manner;  that  the  witnesses  could  not  possibly  have 
been  deceived  themselves;  that  enemies  had  every 
opportunity  and  motive  for  disproving  the  facts,  if 
they  had  not  been  true ;  that  there  is  every  evidence 
of  sincerity  and  honesty  in  the  evangelists;  that  the 
epistles  of  the  apostles  furnish  strong  collateral  proof 
of  the  same  facts;  that  all  Christians  from  the  begin¬ 
ning  must  have  believed  in  these  miracles,  and  they 
must  therefore  be  considered  competent  witnesses; 
that  none  of  the  witnesses  could  have  any  motive  to 
deceive ;  that  they  never  could  have  succeeded  in 
imposing  such  a  fraud  on  the  world,  even  if  they 
could  have  attempted  it;  that  it  would  have  been 
the  easiest  thing  in  the  world  for  the  Jewish  rulers 
to  have  silenced  such  reports  if  they  had  been  false.; 
that  the  commencement  of  preaching  at  Jerusalem, 
and  the  success  of  Christianity  there,  cannot  be  ac¬ 
counted  for  on  any  other  supposition  than  the  truth 
of  the  miracles;  that  the  conduct  of  the  apostles  in 
going  to  the  most  enlightened  countries  and  cities, 
and  their  success  in  those  places,  can  never  be  recon¬ 
ciled  with  the  idea  that  they  were  ignorant  impos¬ 
tors;  and  finally,  that  no  contrary  evidence  exists,  but 
that  even  the  early  enemies  of  Christianity  have 
been  obliged  to  admit  that  such  miracles  were  per 
formed. 

When  all  these  things  are  fairly  and  fully  con¬ 
sidered,  is  it  not  more  probable  that  miracles  were 
performed,  than  that  such  a  body  of  testimony,  so 
corroborated  by  circumstances,  and  by  effects,  reach¬ 
ing  to  our  own  times,  should  be  false  ? 

If  all  this  testimony  is  false,  we  may  call  in  ques 


118 


EVIDENCES  OE  CHRISTIANITY. 


tion  all  historical  testimony  whatever;  for  what  facts 
have  ever  been  so  fully  attested? 

But  why  should  this  testimony  be  rejected?  No 
reason  has  ever  been  assigned,  except  that  the  facts 
were  miraculous:  but  we  have  shown  that  it  is  not 
unreasonable  to  expect  miracles  in  such  a  case,  and 
that  miracles  are  capable  of  satisfactory  proof  from 
testimony.  It  is,  therefore,  a  just  conclusion,  that 
the  Miracles  or  the  Gospel  are  credible. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


THE  RAPID  AND  EXTENSIVE  PROGRESS  OF  THE  GOSPEL,  BY  INSTRUMENTS 
SO  FEW  AND  FEEBLE,  IS  A  PROOF  OF  DIVINE  INTERPOSITION. 


The  success  of  the  gospel,  under  the  circumstances 
of  its  first  publication,  is  one  of  the  most  wonderful 
events  recorded  in  history;  and  it  is  a  fact  beyond 
all  dispute.  In  a  little  time,  thousands  of  persons 
embraced  the  Christian  religion  in  Jerusalem,  and 
in  other  parts  of  Judea.  In  heathen  countries  its 
success  was  still  more  astonishing.  Churches  were 
planted  in  all  the  principal  cities  of  the  Roman  Em¬ 
pire,  before  half  a  century  had  elapsed  from  the 
resurrection  of  Christ.  The  fires  of  persecution  raged; 
thousands  and  tens  of  thousands  of  unoffending  Chris¬ 
tians  were  put  to  death,  in  a  cruel  manner ;  yet  this 
cause  seemed  to  prosper  the  more,  so  that  it  became 
a  proverb,  that  “  the  blood  of  the  martyrs  was  the 
seed  of  the  Church.”  And  it  went  on  increasing  and 
prevailing,  until  in  less  than  three  centuries,  it  be¬ 
came  the  religion  of  the  empire. 

That  the  Christian  religion  did  actually  prevail  and 
was  widely  extended  within  a  short  period  after  its 
first  publication,  is  matter  of  undoubted  history.  The 
testimony  confirming  this  fact  is  not  derived  merely 
from  the  authority  of  Christian  writers  however  riu- 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  119 

merous,  but  also  from  that  of  the  most  respectable 
heathen  historians.  Tacitus,  Suetonius,  and  Pliny 
have  all  borne  witness  to  the  fact,  that  Christianity 
was  extensively  prevalent  in  their  day;  and  as  such 
impartial  witnesses  who  did  not  believe  in  Christian¬ 
ity  but  held  it  in  abhorrence,  is  of  great  weight  in 
establishing  this  fact,  and  it  may  not  be  easily  acces¬ 
sible  to  the  reader,  a  translation  of  their  words  is 
here  subjoined. 

Tacitus  lived  during  the  first  century  of  the  Chris¬ 
tian  era;  and  his  high  character  as  an  historian  is 
known  to  all.  After  describing  the  destructive  fire 
which  desolated  Rome,  he  proceeds  thus:  “But  nei¬ 
ther  by  human  aid,  nor  by  the  costly  largesses  by 
which  he  attempted  to  propitiate  the  gods,  was  the 
prince  able  to  remove  from  himself  the  infamy  which 
had  attached  to  him  in  the  opinion  of  all,  for  having 
ordered  the  conflagration.  To  suppress  this  rumour, 
therefore,  Nero  caused  others  to  be  accused,  on  whom 
he  inflicted  exquisite  torments,  who  were  already 
lmted  by  the  people  for  their  crimes,  and  were  vul¬ 
garly  denominated  Christians.  This  name  they 
derived  from  Christ  their  leader,  who  in  the  reign 
of  Tiberius  was  put  to  death  as  a  criminal,  while 
Pontius  Pilate  was  procurator.  This  destructive 
superstition,  repressed  for  a  while,  again  broke  out, 
and  spread  not  only  through  Judea  where  it  origina¬ 
ted,  but  reached  this  city  also,  into  which  flow  all 
things  that  are  vile  and  abominable,  and  where  they 
are  encouraged.  At  first,  they  only  were  seized  who 
confessed  that  they  belonged  to  this  sect,  and  after¬ 
wards,  a  vast  multitude,  by  the  information  of  those 
who  were  condemned,  not  so  much  for  the  crime  of 
burning  the  city,  as  for  hatred  of  the  human  race. 
These,  clothed  in  the  skins  of  wild  beasts,  were  ex¬ 
posed  to  derision,  and  were  either  torn  to  pieces  by 
dogs,  or  were  affixed  to  crosses :  or  when  the  daylight 
was  past,  were  set  on  fire,  that  they  might  serve 
instead  of  lamps  for  the  night.” 

Suetonius  also  lived  in  the  first  century,  but  his 
life  extended  into  the  second.  His  character  as  a 


120  EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 

well  informed  and  correct  historian  is  also  high.  His 
testimony  is  as  follows:  “He  [Claudius]  banished  the 
Jews  from  Rome  who  were  continually  raising  dis¬ 
turbances,  Christ  (Chrestus)  being  their  leader.”  And 
in  the  life  of  Nero,  he  says,  “  The  Christians  were 
punished,  a  sort  of  men  of  a  new  and  magical  religion.” 
But  the  fact  which  we  wish  to  establish  is,  perhaps, 
more  fully  confirmed  by  the  testimony  of  Pliny  the 
younger,  than  by  any  other  Roman  writer.  It  is 
contained  in  a  letter  addressed  by  this  distinguished 
philosopher  to  the  emperor  Trajan,  in  the  begin¬ 
ning  of  the  second  century.  “  Pliny,  to  the  emperor 
Trajan,  wisheth  health,  &c.  It  is  my  custom,  Sir,  to 
refer  all  things  to  you  of  which  I  entertain  any  doubt ; 
for  who  can  better  direct  me  in  my  hesitation  or 
instruct  my  ignorance?  I  was  never  before  present 
at  any  of  the  trials  of  the  Christians;  so  that  I  am 
ignorant  both  of  the  matter  to  be  inquired  into,  and 
of  the  nature  of  the  punishment  which  should  be 
inflicted,  and  to  what  length  the  investigation  is  to 
be  extended.  I  have,  moreover,  been  in  great  uncer¬ 
tainty  whether  any  difference  ought  to  be  made  on 
account  of  age,  between  the  young  and  tender,  and 
the  robust ;  and  also  whether  any  place  should  be 
allowed  for  repentance  and  pardon;  or  whether  those 
who  have  once  been  Christians  should  be  punished, 
although  they  have  now  ceased  to  be  such,  and 
whether  punishment  should  be  inflicted  merely  on 
account  of  the  name,  where  no  crimes  are  charged, 
or  whether  crimes  connected  with  the  name  are  the 
proper  object  of  punishment.  This,  however,  is  the 
method  which  I  have  pursued  in  regard  to  those 
who  were  brought  before  me  as  Christians.  I  inter¬ 
rogated  them  whether  they  were  Christians  ;  and 
upon  their  confessing  that  they  were,  I  put  the  ques¬ 
tion  to  them  a  second,  and  a  third  time,  threatening 
them  with  capital  punishment ;  and  when  they  per¬ 
sisted  in  their  confession,  I  ordered  them  to  be  led 
away  to  execution;  for  whatever  might  be  the  nature 
of  their  crime,  I  could  not  doubt  that  perverseness 
and  inflexible  obstinacy  deserve  to  be  punished. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  121 

There  were  others,  addicted  to  the  same  insanity, 
whom,  because  they  were  Roman  citizens,  I  have 
noted  down  to  be  sent  to  the  city.  In  a  short  space, 
the  crime  diffusing  itself,  as  is  common,  a  great 
variety  of  cases  have  fallen  under  my  cognizance 
An  anonymous  libel  was  exhibited  to  me,  containing 
the  names  of  many  persons  who  denied  that  they 
were  Christians  or  ever  had  been:  and  as  an  evi¬ 
dence  of  their  sincerity,  they  joined  me  in  an  address 
to  the  gods,  and  to  your  image,  which  I  had  ordered 
to  be  brought  along  with  the  images  of  the  gods  for 
this  very  purpose.  Moreover,  they  sacrificed  with 
wine  and  frankincense,  and  blasphemed  the  name 
of  Christ :  none  of  which  things  can  those  who  are 
really  Christians  be  constrained  to  do.  Therefore  I 
judged  it  proper  to  dismiss  them.  Others,  named  by 
the  informer,  at  first  confessed  themselves  to  be  Chris¬ 
tians,  and  afterwards  denied  it ;  and  some  asserted 
that  although  they  had  been  Christians,  they  had 
ceased  to  be  such  for  more  than  three  years,  and 
some  as  much  as  twenty  years.  All  these  worship¬ 
ped  your  image  and  the  statues  of  the  gods,  and  exe¬ 
crated  Christ.  But  they  affirmed  that  this  was  the 
sum  of  their  fault  or  error,  that  they  were  accus¬ 
tomed,  on  a  stated  day,  to  meet  together  before  day, 
to  sing  a  hymn  to  Christ  in  concert,  as  to  a  God,  and 
to  bind  themselves  by  a  solemn  oath  not  to  commit 
any  wickedness — but  on  the  contrary,  to  abstain  from 
theft,  robbery,  and  adultery — also,  never  to  violate 
their  promise,  nor  deny  a  pledge  committed  to  them. 
These  things  being  performed,  it  was  their  custom  to 
separate ;  and  to  meet  again  at  a  promiscuous,  inno¬ 
cent  meal;  which,  however,  they  had  omitted,  from 
the  time  of  the  publication  of  my  edict,  by  which, 
according  to  your  orders,  I  forbad  assemblies  of  this 
sort;  On  receiving  this  account,  I  judged  it  to  be 
more  necessary  to  examine  by  torture,  two  females, 
who  were  called  deaconesses.  But  I  discovered  no¬ 
thing  except  a  depraved  and  immoderate  superstition. 
Whereupon,  suspending  further  judicial  proceedings, 
I  have  recourse  to  you  for  advice;  for  it  has  appeared 

11 


122 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY1. 


to  me  that  the  subject  is  highly  deserving  of  conside¬ 
ration,  especially  on  account  of  the  great  number  of 
persons  whose  lives  are  put  into  jeopardy.  Many 
persons  of  all  ages,  sexes,  and  conditions  are  accused, 
and  many  more  will  be  in  the  same  situation;  for 
the  contagion  of  this  superstition  has  not  merely  per¬ 
vaded  the  cities,  but  also  all  villages  and  country 
places;  yet  it  seems  to  me  that  it  might  be  restrained 
and  corrected.  It  is  a  matter  of  fact,  that  the  temples 
which  were  almost  deserted  begin  again  to  be  fre- 
cpiented;  and  the  sacred  solemnities  which  had  been 
long  intermitted  are  again  attended ;  and  victims  for 
the  altars  are  now  readily  sold,  which,  a  while  ago, 
were  almost  without  purchasers.  Whence  it  is  easy 
to  conjecture  what  a  multitude  of  men  might  be  re¬ 
claimed,  if  only  the  door  to  repentance  was  left 
open.” 

To  which  the  emperor  replied  as  follows : — “  Tra¬ 
jan  to  Pliny — Health  and  happiness. 

“  You  have  taken  the  right  method,  my  Pliny,  in 
dealing  with  those  who  have  been  brought  before  you 
as  Christians ;  for  it  is  impossible  to  establish  any 
universal  rule  which  will  apply  to  all  cases.  They 
should  not  be  sought  after ;  but  when  they  are 
brought  before  you  and  convicted,  they  must  be 
punished.  Nevertheless,  if  any  one  deny  that  he  is 
a  Christian,  and  confirm  his  assertion,  by  his  conduct; 
that  is,  by  worshipping  our  gods,  although  he  may 
*  be  suspected  of  having  been  one  in  time  past,  let  him 
obtain  pardon  on  repentance.  But  in  no  case  permit 
a  libel  against  any  one  to  be  received,  unless  it  be 
signed  by  the  person  who  presents  it,  for  that  would 
be  a  dangerous  precedent,  and  in  no  wise  suitable  to 
the  present  age.” 

Other  heathen  testimonies  might  be  adduced,  and 
which  may  be  seen  in  “  Lardner’s  heathen  testimo¬ 
nies:”  but  for  the  sake  of  brevity  they  are  omitted. 
And  the  testimonies  of  the  two  Christian  fathers — 
Iren^us  and  Tertullian,  who  both  lived  at  the 
close  of  the  second,  and  beginning  of  the  third  cen¬ 
tury,  will  be  sufficient  to  show,  beyond  all  controver- 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


123 


sy,  how  extensively  the  Christian  religion  prevailed 
in  their  day. 

Irenaeus,  speaking  of  the  uniformity  of  the  faith  of 
Christians,  says,  “  Neither  do  those  churches  which 
are  established  among  the  Germans  believe  or  teach 
otherwise;  nor  do  those  among  the  Hiberii  or  the 
Celts ;  nor  those  in  the  East ,  nor  those  in  Egypt, 
nor  those  in  Libya,  nor  those  established  in  the  cen¬ 
tral  parts  of  the  world.”* 

The  language  of  Tertullian  is  still  more  to  our 
purpose,  and  nothing  further  will  be  needed  in  the 
way  of  testimony,  to  show  the  extent  of  Christianity 
in  less  than  one  century  after  the  death  of  the  last  of 
the  apostles.  “In  whom,”  says  he,  “but  the  Christ 
now  come,  have  all  nations  believed  ?  for  in  whom 
do  all  other  nations  (but  yours,  the  Jews)  confide? 
Parthians,  Medes,  Elamites,  and  the  dwellers  in 
Mesopotamia,  Armenia,  Phrygia,  Cappadocia,  and 
the  inhabitants  of  Pontus,  Asia,  and  Pamphylia;  the 
dwellers  in  Egypt,  and  inhabitants  of  Africa  beyond 
Cyrene;  Romans  and  strangers;  and  in  Jerusalem, 
both  Jews  and  proselytes; — so  that  the  various  tribes 
of  the  Getuli,  and  the  numerous  hordes  of  the  Mau¬ 
ri  ;  all  the  Spanish  -clans  and  different  nations  of 
Gauls,  and  the  provinces  of  the  Britons  inaccessible 
to  the  Romans,  but  subdued  by  Christ — and  of  the 
Samaritans  and  Dacians,  and  Germans,  and  Scythi¬ 
ans;  and  many  unexplored  nations,  and  countries, 
and  islands  unknown  to  us,  and  which  we  cannot 
enumerate  —  in  all  which  places  the  name  of  the 
Christ  who  has  come,  now  reigns;  for  who  could 
reign  over  all  these  but  Christ,  the  Son  of  God?”t 

There  is  another  testimony  of  this  father,  in  his 
Apology,  which  was  written  a  little  before  the  close 
of  the  second  century;  and  seems  to  have  been  ad¬ 
dressed  to  the  Proconsul  of  Africa,  and  to  the  other 
prefects  of  that  province,  of  which  he  was  an  inhab¬ 
itant.  He  there  speaks  in  the  following  manner: — - 
“  If  we  Christians  were  disposed  to  array  ourselves 

*  Iren.  Adv.  Hter.  1.  1,  c.  X. 

t  Tertullian  Contra  Judajos.  cap.  7. 


124 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


as  open  or  secret  enemies  of  our  opposers,  a  sufficient 
force  of  numbers  is  not  wanting  to  us.  Many  of  the 
Moors  and  Marcomianni,  as  well  as  other  tribes  more 
remote,  even  to  the  very  ends  of  the  earth,  and 
throughout  the  world,  are  with  us.  We  are  but  of 
yesterday,  and  yet  we  have  filled  all  your  places; 
your  cities,  your  islands,  your  castles,  your  towns, 
your  council  houses,  your  very  camps,  your  tribes, 
your  palace,  your  senate,  your  forum.  We  have  left 
you  nothing  but  your  temples.  If  we  should  break 
away  from  you  and  should  remove  into  some  other 
country,  the  mere  loss  of  so  many  citizens  would 
overwhelm  your  government ;  and  would  itself  be 
an  effectual  punishment.  Doubtless  you  would  be 
frightened  at  your  own  solitude.  The  silence  and 
stupor  which  you  would  witness,  would  cause  the 
world  over  which  you  reign  to  appear  as  dead. 
Your  enemies  would  then  be  more  than  your  citizens 
who  should  remain.”*  It  will  be  unnecessary  to 
adduce  more  testimonies,  for  the  fact  is  undisputed; 
and  in  a  short  time  the  majority  of  the  empire  were 
professedly  Christians. 

Learned  infidels  have  in  vain  attempted  to  assign 
an  adequate  cause  for  this  event  on  natural  princi¬ 
ples.  Gibbon  exerted  all  his  ingenuity  to  account  for 
the  progress  and  establishment  of  Christianity;  but 
though  he  has  freely  indulged  conjecture,  and  disre¬ 
garded  the  testimony  of  Christians,  his  efforts  have 
been  unavailing.  The  account  which  he  has  given 
is  entirely  unsatisfactory.  Upon  the  deistical  hypo¬ 
thesis,  it  is  a  grand  revolution  without  any  adequate 
cause.  That  a  few  unlearned  and  simple  men,  most¬ 
ly  fishermen  of  Galilee,  without  power  or  patronage, 
and  employing  no  other  weapons  but  persuasion, 
should  have  been  successful  in  changing  the  religion 
of  the  world,  must  forever  remain  an  unaccountable 
thing,  unless  we  admit  the  reality  of  miracles  and 
supernatural  aid. 

The  argument  from  the  rapid  and  extensive  pro- 

*  Tertull.  Apologeticus. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


125 


gress  of  the  gospel  may  be  estimated,  if  we  consider 
the  following  circumstances. 

1.  The  insufficiency  of  the  instruments  to  accom¬ 
plish  such  a  work,  without  supernatural  aid.  They 
had  neither  the  learning  nor  address  to  make  such  an 
impression  on  the  minds  of  men,  as  was  requisite  to 
bring  about  such  a  revolution.  It  would  have  been 
impracticable  for  a  few  unlettered  Jews  to  acquire 
the  languages  of  all  the  nations,  among  whom  the 
gospel  spread  in  so  short  a  time.  They  must  have 
had  the  gift  of  tongues,  or  this  conquest  could  never 
have  been  achieved.  Besides,  it  ought  to  be  remem¬ 
bered,  that  Jews  were  held  in  great  contempt  by  all 
the  surrounding  nations.  A  few  persons  of  this 
nation,  exhibiting  a  very  mean  appearance,  as  must 
have  been  the  case,  would  have  called  forth  nothing 
but  derision  and  contempt,  in  any  of  the  large  cities 
of  the  empire.  It  is  more  unlikely  that  they  could 
have  been  able  to  make  many  converts,  than  that  a 
few  poor  Jewish  mechanics  should  now  proselyte  to 
Judaism  vast  multitudes  in  all  the  principal  cities  of 
Europe  and  America.* 

2.  The  places  in  which  the  gospel  was  first  preach¬ 
ed  and  had  greatest  success,  furnish  proof  that  it 
could  not  have  been  propagated  merely  by  human 
means.  These  were  not  obscure  corners,  remote 
from  the  lights  of  science,  but  the  most  populous  and 
polished  cities,  where  every  species  of  the  learning  of 
the  age  was  concentrated,  and  whither  men  of  learn¬ 
ing  resorted.  Damascus,  Antioch,  Ephesus,  Corinth, 
Philippi  and  Rome  furnished  the  theatre  for  the  first 
preachers  of  the  gospel.  It  is  believed,  that  there 
was  no  conspicuous  city  in  the  central  part  of  the 
Roman  empire,  in  which  the  Christian  church  was 
not  planted  before  the  death  of  the  apostles.  And  il 
ought  to  be  remembered,  that  this  did  not  occur  in  a 
dark  age,  but  in  what  is  ackno  wledged  by  all  to  be 
the  most  enlightened  age  of  antiquity:  it  was  the 
period  which  immediately  succeeded  the  Augustan 

h*  See  Dr.  S.  S.  Smith’s  Lectures  on  the  Evidences  of  Christianity. 

11* 


126  EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 

Age,  so  much  and  so  deservedly  celebrated  for  its 
classical  authors.  If  the  gospel  had  been  an  impos¬ 
ture,  its  propagators  would  never  have  gone  to  such 
places  in  the  first  instance ;  or,  if  they  had,  they  could 
not  have  escaped  detection. 

3.  The  obstacles  to  be  overcome  were  great,  and 
insurmountable  by  human  effort.  The  people  were 
all  attached  to  the  respective  superstitions  in  which 
they  had  been  educated,  and  which  were  all  adapted 
to  retain  their  hold  on  corrupt  minds.  How  difficult 
it  is  to  obtain  even  a  hearing  from  the  people  in  such 
circumstances,  is  manifest  from  the  experience  of  all 
missionaries  in  modern  times.  Philosophers,  priests, 
and  rulers,  were  combined  against  them.  All  that 
learning,  eloquence,  prejudice,  interest,  and  power, 
could  oppose  to  them,  stood  in  their  way. 

Not  only  were  priests,  philosophers,  and  rulers 
combined  against  them,  but  the  prejudices  of  the 
multitude  in  favour  of  the  corrupt  religion  in  which 
they  had  been  educated,  inspired  them  with  a  furious 
zeal  in  opposition  to  all  attempts  to  convert  them 
from  their  errors.  In  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  we 
have  many  instances  recorded  of  the  blind  fury  of 
the  people  leading  them  to  acts  of  outrage  and  vio¬ 
lence  towards  the  first  preachers  of  the  gospel,  both 
among  Jews  and  Gentiles.  In  one  of  these  tumults, 
Stephen  was  martyred ;  and  in  another,  which  took 
place  in  the  temple,  Paul  had  like  to  have  been  torn 
to  pieces  by  the  violence  of  the  people.  And  at 
Ephesus,  we  know  what  a  tumult  was  excited  by 
Demetrius  the  silversmith ;  and  at  several  other  places. 
But  it  appears  that  only  a  few  of  these  tumults  which 
extended  to  personal  violence,  are  recorded  in  the 
Acts,  for  Paul  in  his  second  epistle  to  the  Corinthi¬ 
ans  writes  thus: — “  Of  the  Jews  five  times  received 
I  forty  stripes  save  one.  Three  times  was  I  beaten 
with  rods — once  was  I  stoned.”  And  it  is  probable 
that  all  the  apostles  and  primitive  preachers  expe¬ 
rienced  similar  treatment ;  and  had  they  not  been 
divinely  supported  and  aided,  they  would  never  have 
been  able  to  withstand  such  infuriated  opposition; 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  127 

much  less  could  they  have  brought  over  thousands 
and  tens  of  thousands  to  subject  themselves  to  the 
yoke  of  Christ,  and  expose  themselves  to  the  same 
ignominy  and  persecution  to  which  they  were  con¬ 
tinually  exposed  themselves. 

4.  The  terms  of  discipleship  which  the  apostles 
proposed,  and  the  doctrines  which  they  preached, 
were  not  adapted  to  allure  and  flatter  the  people, 
but  must  have  been  very  repulsive  to  the  minds  of 
men.  Impostors,  when  they  attempt  to  propagate 
a  new  religion,  always  endeavour  to  adapt  their  doc¬ 
trines  and  precepts  to  the  tastes  of  the  people  whom 
they  aim  to  proselyte.  But  the  author  of  Christianity 
and  his  apostles  pursued  no  such  man-pleasing  course. 
Their  first  requisition  was  that  men  should  deny 
themselves,  and  take  up  their  cross.  Their  hearers 
were  commanded  to  repent  and  forsake  all  their  sins, 
however  profitable,  pleasant,  or  inveterate.  They 
were  peremptorily  required  to  forsake  all  their  world¬ 
ly  possessions,  and  even  their  nearest  and  dearest 
friends,  for  the  sake  of  the  gospel.  And  this  was  not 
all;  they  were  explicitly  told,  that  they  must  hold 
themselves  ready  to  sacrifice  life  itself  when  they 
could  not  preserve  it  without  disobeying  Christ.  And 
no  prospect  of  ease  or  honour  in*this  world  was  held 
out  to  them,  but  theyswere  assured,  that  persecution 
awaited  them  as  long  as  they  lived,  and  that  through 
much  tribulation  they  must  pass;  and  that  their  only 
reward  was .  spiritual  peace,  and  eternal  life  in  the 
world  to  come.  Would  any  impostors  have  been  so 
stupid  as  to  propose  such  terms,  or  if  they  could  have 
been  so  foolish,  can  any  one  believe  that  they  would 
have  been  successful  in  converting  the  world  to  em¬ 
brace  their  system?  Nothing  more  is  necessary  to 
prove  that  the  Christian  religion  was  divine,  than  to 
contemplate  the  terms  of  discipleship,  and  then  con¬ 
sider  the  multitude  of  converts  of  all  ages,  ranks,  and 
countries.  And  the  prospect  of  persecution  and  death, 
held  up  to  the  first  disciples  by  Christ  and  his  apos¬ 
tles,  was  fully  realized,  and  yet  the  success  of  Chris¬ 
tianity  was  irresistible.  Many  Christians  were  cut  off 


128  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

Dy  persecution,  but  still  Christianity  made  progress, 
and  was  extended  in  all  directions.  Because  Chris¬ 
tianity  increased  and  flourished  under  bloody  perse¬ 
cutions,  many  persons  have  adopted  it  as  a  maxim, 
that  persecution  has  a  tendency  to  promote  any 
cause;  than  which  it  is  difficult  to  conceive  of  any 
thing  more  contrary  to  common  sense  and  experi¬ 
ence.  In  most  cases,  by  cutting  off  the  leaders  of  a 
party,  however  furious  their  fanaticism,  the  cause 
will  decline  and  soon  become  extinct.  The  increase 
of  Christianity,  under  ten  bloody  persecutions,  can 
only  be  accounted  for,  by  supposing  that  God  by 
his  grace  persuaded  men  to  embrace  the'  .truth,  and 
inspired  them  with  - more  than  heroic  fortitude  in 
suffering  for  the  sake  of  Iheir  religion.  Many  of  the 
primitive  Christians  attested  the  truth  by  martyrdom. 
They  sealed  their  testimony  with  their  blood.  To 
this  argument  it  is  sometimes  answered,  that  men  may 
suffer  martyrdom  for  a  false  as  well  as  a  true  reli¬ 
gion,  and  that,  in  fact,  men  have  been  willing  to  die 
for  opinions  in  direct  opposition  to  each  other.  While 
this  is  admitted,  it  does  not  affect  the  argument  now 
adduced.  All  that  dying  for  an  opinion  can  prove 
(and  of  this  it  is  the  best  possible  evidence,)  is  the 
sincerity  of  the  witnesses.  But  in  the  case  before  us 
the  sincerity  of  the  witnesses  proves  the  facts  in  ques¬ 
tion  ;  for  we  have  seen  that  they  could  not  them¬ 
selves  have  been  deceived.  Every  martyr  had  the 
opportunity  of  knowing  the  truth  of  the  facts  on 
which  Christianity  was  founded;  and  by  suffering 
death  in  attestation  of  them,  he  has  given  the  most 
impressive  testimony  that  can  be  conceived.* 

The  sufferings  of  the  primitive  Christians  for  their 
religion  were  exceedingly  great,  and  are  attested  by 
heathen  as  well  as  Christian  writers.  It  is  a  cir¬ 
cumstance  of  great  importance  in  this  argument,  that 
they  could  at  once  have  escaped  all  their  torments  by 
renouncing  Christianity.  To  bring  them  to  this  was 
the  sole  object  of  their  persecutors;  and  uniformly  it 
was  put  to  their  choice,  to  offer  sacrifice  or  incense 

*  See  Addison’s  Evidences. 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY.  129 

to  the  heathen  gods,  or  be  tormented.  One  word 
would  have  been  sufficient  to  deliver  them;  one  easy 
action  would  have  restored  them  to  worldly  com¬ 
forts  and  honours.  But  they  steadfastly  adhered  to 
their  profession.  Some  indeed  were  overcome  by 
the  cruelty  of  their  persecutors;  but  was  it  ever  heard 
that  any  of  them  confessed  that  there  was  any  fraud 
or  imposture  among  them  ?  '  So  far  from  it,  they 
whose  courage  had  failed  them  in  the  trying  hour, 
were  commonly  deep  penitents  on  account  of  their 
weakness,  all  the  rest  of  their  days.  Let  it  be  remem¬ 
bered,  that  no  person  suffered  for  Christianity  through 
necessity.  Every  martyr  made  a  voluntary  sacrifice 
of  himself,  to  maintain  the  truth  and  to  preserve  a 
good  conscience. 

5.  There  is  yet  another  light  in  which  these  suffer¬ 
ings  of  the  primitive  Christians  ought  to  be  viewed. 
It  is  the  temper  with  which  they  endured  every  kind 
of  torment.  Here  again  is  a  problem  for  the  deist  to 
solve.  Persons  of  all  ages,  of  all  conditions  of  life, 
and  of  both  sexes,  exhibited  under  protracted  and 
cruel  torments,  a  fortitude,  a  patience,  a  meekness,  a 
spirit  of  charity  and  forgiveness,  a  cheerfulness,  yea 
often  a  triumphant  joy,  of  which  there  are  no  exam¬ 
ples  to  be  found  in  the  history  of  the  world.  They 
rejoiced  when  they  were  arrested;  cheerfully  bade 
adieu  to  their  nearest  and  dearest  relatives;  gladly 
embraced  the  stake ;  welcomed  the  wild  beasts  let 
loose  to  devour  them;  smiled  on  the  horrible  appa¬ 
ratus  by  which  their  sinews  were  to  be  stretched, 
and  their  bones  dislocated  and  broken;  uttered  no 
complaints;  gave  no  indication  of  pain  when  their 
bodies  were  enveloped  in  flames ;  and  when  con¬ 
demned  to  die,  begged  of  their  friends  to  interpose 
no  obstacle  to  their  felicity  (for  such  they  esteemed 
martyrdom,)  not  even  by  prayers  for  their  deliver¬ 
ance.*  What  more  than  human  fortitude  was  this? 
By  what  spirit  were  these  despised  and  persecuted 
people  sustained?  What  natural  principles  in  the 
human  constitution  can  satisfactorily  account  for  such 

*  See  the  Epistles  of  Ignatius  and  Poly  carp. 


/ 


130  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

superiority  to  pain  and  death?  Could  attachment  to 
an  impostor  inspire  them  with  such  feelings?  No; 
it  was  the  promised  presence  of  the  risen  Jesus  which 
upheld  them,  and  filled  them  with  assurance  and 
joy.  It  was  the  Paraclete,  promised  by  their 
Lord,  who  poured  into  their  hearts  a  peace  and  joy 
so  complete,  that  they  were  scarcely  sensible  of  the 
wounds  inflicted  on  their  bodies.  Proud  and  obsti¬ 
nate  men  may  perhaps  suffer  for  what  they  are 
secretly  convinced  is  not  true;  but  that  multitudes, 
of  all  conditions,  should  joyfully  suffer  for  what  they 
know  to  be  an  imposture,  is  imposssible.  Tender 
women  and  venerable  old  men  were  among  the  most 
conspicuous  of  the  martyrs  of  Jesus.  “  They  loved 
not  their  lives  unto  the  death,”  and  have  given  their 
testimony  and  sealed  it  with  their  blood.  They  are 
now  clothed  in  white  robes,  and  bear  palms  in  their 
hands,  and  sing  the  song  of  Moses  and  the  Lamb. 
Blessed  martyrs!  they  have  rested  from  their  labours, 
and  their  works  have  followed  them! 


CHAPTER  IX. 

PROPHECIES  RESPECTING  THE  JEWISH  NATION  WHICH  HAVE  BEEN  RE¬ 
MARKABLY  FULFILLED. 

The  Bible  contains  predictions  of  events  which  no 
human  sagacity  could  have  foreseen,  and  these  pre¬ 
dictions  have  been  exactly  and  remarkably  accom¬ 
plished. 

The  subject  of  prophecy  is  so  extensive,  and  the 
difficulty  of  presenting,  with  brevity,  the  argument 
which  it  furnishes  so  great,  that  if  I  had  not  deter¬ 
mined  to  give  a  general  outline  of  the  evidences  of 
revelation,  I  should  have  omitted  this  topic  as  one  to 
which  justice  cannot  be  done  in  so  short  an  essay. 
But  I  would  not  be  understood  .as  intimating,  that 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  131 

the  evidence  from  prophecy  is  of  an  inferior  kind. 
So  far  from  believing  this  to  be  the  fact,  I  am  per¬ 
suaded  that  whoever  will  take  the  pains  to  examine 
the  subject  thoroughly,  will  find  that  this  source  of 
evidence  for  the  truth  of  revelation  is  exceeded  by 
no  other  in  the  firmness  of  conviction  which  it  is  cal¬ 
culated  to  produce.  Prophecy  possesses,  as  a  proof 
of  divine  revelation,  some  advantages  which  are 
peculiar.  For  the  proof  of  miracles  we  must  have 
recourse  to  ancient  testimony;  but  the  fulfilling  of 
prophecy  may  fall  under  our  own  observation,  or 
may  be  conveyed  to  us  by  living  witnesses.  The 
evidence  of  miracles  cannot,  in  any  case,  become 
stronger  than  it  was  at  first ;  but  that  of  prophecy 
is  continually  increasing,  and  will  go  on  increasing, 
until  the  whole  scheme  of  predictions  is  fulfilled. 
The  mere  publication  of  a  prediction  furnishes  no 
decisive  evidence  that  it  is  a  revelation  from  God ; 
it  is  the  accomplishment  which  completes  the  proof. 
As  prophecies  have  been  fulfilled  in  every  age,  and 
are  still  in  a  course  of  being  fulfilled ;  and  as  some 
most  remarkable,  predictions  remain  to  be  accom¬ 
plished,  it  is  plain,  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  that 
this  proof  will  continue  to  increase  in  strength. 

It  deserves  to  be  well  weighed,  that  any  one  pre¬ 
diction  which  has  been  fulfilled,  is  of  itself  a  com¬ 
plete  evidence  of  divine  revelation;  or  to  speak  more 
properly,  is  itself  a  revelation.  For  certainly  no  one 
but  God  himself  can  foretell  distant  future  events, 
which  depend  entirely  on  the  purpose  of  Him  “  who 
worketh  all  things  after  the  counsel  of  his  own  will.” 

If,  then,  we  can  adduce  one  prophecy,  the  accom¬ 
plishment  of  which  cannot  be  doubted,  we  have 
established  the  principle  that  a  revelation  has  been 
given ;  and  if  m  one  instance,  and  to  one  person,  the 
probability  is  strong  that  he  is  not  the  only  person 
who  has  been  favoured  with  such  a  communication. 

The  remark  which  is  frequently  made,  that  most 
prophecies  are  obscure,  and  the  meaning  very  uncer¬ 
tain,  will  not  affect  the  evidence  arising  from  such  as 
are  perspicuous,  and  of  which  the  accomplishment  is 


132 


EVIDENCES  OE  CHRISTIANITY. 


exact.  There  are  good  reasons  why  these  future 
events  should  sometimes  he  wrapped  up  in  the  cov¬ 
ering  of  strong  figures  and  symbolical  language ;  so 
that  often  the  prophet  himself,  probably,  did  not 
understand  the  meaning  of  the  prediction  which  he 
uttered.  It  was  not  intended  that  they  should  be 
capable  of  being  clearly  interpreted,  until  the  key 
was  furnished  by  the  completion.  If  these  observa¬ 
tions  are  just,  the  study  of  the  prophecies  will  become 
more  and  more  interesting  every  day,  and  they  will 
shed  more  and  more  light  on  the  truth  of  the  Scrip¬ 
tures. 

What  I  shall  attempt,  at  present,  and  all  that  is 
compatible  with  the  narrow  limits  of  this  discourse, 
will  be,  to  exhibit  a  few  remarkable  predictions,  and 
refer  to  the  events  in  which  they  have  been  fulfilled. 
They  who  wish  for  further  satisfaction,  will  find  it 
in  the  perusal  of  Bishop  Newton’s  excellent  Disser¬ 
tations  on  the  Prophecies,  to  which  I  acknowledge 
myself  indebted  for  a  considerable  part  of  what  is 
contained  in  this  chapter,  and  to  Keith  on  the  Pro¬ 
phecies. 

The  first  prophecies  which  I  shall  produce,  are 
those  of  Moses  respecting  the  Jews.  They  are  re¬ 
corded,  principally,  in  the  twenty-sixth  chapter  of 
Leviticus  and  in  the  twenty-eighth  chapter  of'  Deu¬ 
teronomy;  of  which  the  following  predictions  deserve 
our  attention. 

1.  “The  Lord  shall  bring  a  nation  against  thee 
from  afar,  from  the  end  of  the  earth,  as  swift  as  the 
eagle  flieth;  a  nation  whose  tongue  thou  shalt  not 
understand.”  This  prophecy  had  an  accomplish¬ 
ment  in  the  invasion  of  Judea  by  the  Chaldeans  and 
by  the  Romans,  but  more  especially  the  latter.  Jere¬ 
miah,  when  predicting  the  invasion  of  the  Chaldeans, 
uses  nearly  the  same  language  as  Moses.  “  Lo,  I 
will  bring  a  nation  upon  you  from  afar,  0  house  of 
Israel,  saith  the  Lord;  it  is  an  ancient  nation,  a  nation 
whose  language  thou  knowest  not.”*  And  again, 
“  Our  persecutors  are  swifter  than  the  eagles  of  the 

*  Jer.  x.  15. 


EVIDENCES  OE  CHRISTIANITV.  133 

heaven.”*  But  with  still  greater  propriety  may  it 
be  said  that  the  Romans  were  a  nation  “  from  afar;” 
the  rapidity  of  whose  conquests  resembled  the  eagle’s 
flight ;  the  standard  of  whose  armies  was  an  eagle ; 
and  whose*  language  Avas  unknown  to  the  Jews.  * 
The  enemies  of  the  Jews  are  always  characterized 
as  “  a  nation  of  fierce  countenance,  who  shall  not 
regard  the  person  of  the  old,  nor  show  favour  to  the 
young” — an  exact  description  of  the  Chaldeans.  It 
is  said,  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  17,  that  God  brought  upon 
the  Jews  “  the  king  of  the  Chaldees,  who  slew  their 
young  men  with  the  sword  in  the  house  of  their 
sanctuary,  and  had  no  compassion  upon  young  man 
or  maiden,  old  man,  nor  him  that  stooped  for  age.” 
Such  also  were  the  Romans.  Josephus  informs  us, 
that  when  Vespasian  came  to  Gadara,  “he  slew  all, 
man  by  man,  the  Romans  showing  mercy  to  no  age.” 
The  like  was  done  at  Gamala. 

2.  It  was  predicted,  also,  that  their  cities  should 
be  besieged  and  taken.  “And  he  shall  besiege  thee 
in  all  thy  gates  until  thy  high  and  fenced  walls  come 
down,  wherein  thou  trustedst.”  This  was  fulfilled 
when  Shalmaneser,  king  of  Assyria,  came  against 
Samaria,  and  besieged  it,t  when  Sennacherib  came 
up  against  all  the  fenced  cities  of  Judah,  and  when 
Nebuchadnezzar  took  Jerusalem,  burned  the  temple, 
and  broke  down  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  round  about.f 
The  Jews  had  great  confidence  in  the  strength  of  the 
fortifications  of  Jerusalem.  And  Tacitus,  as  well  as 
Josephus,  describes  it  as  a  very  strong  place;  yet  it 
was  often  besieged  and  taken  before  its  final  destruc¬ 
tion  by  Titus. 

In  their  sieges  they  were  to  suffer  much  by  famine, 
“  in  the  straitness  whereAvith  their  enemies  should 
distress  them.”  Accordingly,  at  Samaria,  during 
the  siege  there  Avas  a  great  famine,  “  so  that  an  ass’s 
head  Avas  sold  for  four  score  pieces  of  sibver.’^  And 
when  Jerusalem  was  besieged  by  Nebuchadnezzar, 
“  the  famine  prevailed  in  the  city,  and  there  Avas  no 

*  Lam.  iv.  19.  \  2  Kings  xxv.  10. 

t  2  Kings  xviii.  9,  10.  §  2  Kings  vi.  6. 


12 


134 


EVIDENCES  OE  CHRISTIANITY. 


bread  for  the  people  of  the  land.”*  And  in  the  siege 
of  the  same  city  by  the  Romans,  there  was  a  most 
distressing  famine.t 

It  was  foretold  that  in  these  famines  women  should 
eat' their  own  children.  “  Ye  shall  eat,”  says  Moses, 
“  the  flesh  of  your  sons  and  of  your  daughters.” 
And  again,  “thou  shalt  eat  the  fruit  of  thine  own 
body.”f  “  The  tender  and  the  delicate  woman 
among  you,  who  would  not  venture  to  set  the  sole 
of  her  foot  upon  the  ground,  for  delicateness  and  ten¬ 
derness — she  shall  eat  her  children  for  want  of  all 
things,  secretly  in  the  siege  and  straitness,  wherewith 
thine  enemies  shall  distress  thee  in  thy  gates.”  This 
extraordinary  prediction  was  fulfilled  six  hundred 
years  after  it  was  spoken,  in  the  siege  of  Samaria,  by 
the  king  of  Syria;  when  two  women  agreed  together 
to  give  up  their  children  to  be  eaten;  and  one  of 
them  was  eaten  accordingly.§  It  was  fulfilled  again 
nine  hundred  years  after  Moses,  in  the  siege  of  Jeru¬ 
salem,  by  the  Chaldeans.  “  The  hands  of  the  pitiful 
women,”  says  Jeremiah,  “  have  sodden  their  own 
children.”  ||  And  again,  fifteen  hundred  years  after 
the  time  of  Moses,  when  Jerusalem  was  besieged  by 
the  Romans,  Josephus  informs  us  of  a  noble  woman 
killing  and  eating  her  own  sucking  child;  and  when 
she  had  eaten  half,  she  secreted  the  other  part  for 
another  meal. 

3.  Great  numbers  of  the  Jews  were  to  be  destroy¬ 
ed.  “And  ye  shall  be  left  few  in  number,  whereas 
ye  were  as  the  stars  of  heaven  for  multitude.”  In 
the  siege  of  Jerusalem  by  Titus,  it  is  computed  that 
eleven  hundred  thousand  persons  perished  by  famine, 
pestilence,  and  sword.  Perhaps,  since  the  creation 
of  the  world,  so  many  persons  never  perished  in  any 
one  siega  as  this.  The  occasion  of  so  great  a  multi¬ 
tude  of  people  being  found  at  Jerusalem,  was,  that 
the  siege  commenced  about  the  celebration  of  the 
passover;  and  the  people  throughout  the  adjacent 

§  2  Kings  vi.  28,  29. 

||  Lam.  iv.  10. 


*  2  Kings  xxv.  3. 
t  Josephus  de  Jud.  Bello. 
t  Jer.  xxvi.  29.  Deut.  xxviii.  23. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  135 

country  took  refuge  in  Jerusalem,  at  the  approach 
of  the  Roman  army. 

Moses  also  predicted  that  the  Jews  should  be  car¬ 
ried  back  to  Egypt,  and  sold  as  slaves  for  a  very  low 
price,  and  described  the  method  of  their  conveyance 
thither:  “and  the  Lord  shall  bring  thee  into  Egypt 
again  with  ships,  where  you  shall  be  sold  unto  your 
enemies  for  bondmen  and  bondwomen,  and  no  man 
shall  buy  you.”  Josephus  informs  us  that  when  the 
city  was  taken,  the  captives  whoywere  above  seven¬ 
teen  years  of  age,  were  sent  to  the  works  in  Egypt ; 
but  so  little  care  was  taken  of  these  captives,  that 
eleven  thousand  of  them  perished  for  want.  There 
is  every  probability,  though  the  historian  does  not 
mention  the  fact,  that  they  were  conveyed  to  Egypt 
in  ships,  as, the  Romans  had  then  a  fleet  in  the  Med¬ 
iterranean.  The  market  was  so  overstocked  that 
there  were  no  purchasers,  and  they  were  sold  for  the 
•merest  trifle. 

4.  It  is  moreover  predicted,  in  this  wonderful  pro¬ 
phecy  of  Moses,  that  the  Jews  should  be  extirpated 
from  their  own  land,  and  dispersed  among  all  nations. 
“And  ye  shall  be  plucked  from  off  the  land  whither 
thou  goest  to  possess  it.  And  the  Lord  shall  scatter 
thee  among  all  people,  from  one  end  of  the  earth 
even  unto  the  other.”  How  remarkably  has  this 
been  fulfilled.  The  ten  tribes  were  first  carried  away 
from  .their  own  land  by  the  king  of  Assyria;  next, 
the  two  other  tribes  were  carried  captive  to  Babylon ; 
and,  finally,  when  the  Romans  took  away  “  their 
place  and  nation,”  their  dispersion  was  complete. 

5.  The  Emperor  Adrian,  by  a  public  edict,  forbade 
the  Jews,  on  pain  of  death,  to  set  foot  in  Jerusalem: 
or  even  to  approach  the  country  around  it.  In  the 
time  of  Tertullian  and  Jerome,  they  were  prohibited 
from  entering  Judea.  Aud  from  that  day  to  this,  the 
number  of  Jews  in  the  holy  land  has  been  very  small. 
They  are  still  exiles  from  their  own  land,  and  are 
found  scattered  through  almost  every  country  on  the 
globe. 

It  was  foretold  that,  notwithstanding  their  disper- 


136  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

sion,  they  should  not  be  totally  destroyed,  hut  should 
still  exist  a  distinct  people.  “  And  yet  for  all  that, 
when  they  be  in  the  land  of  their  enemies,  I  will  not 
cast  them  away,  neither  will  I  abhor  them,  to  destroy 
them  utterly,  and  to  break  my  covenant  with  them.” 
“What  a  marvellous  thing -is  this,”  says  Bishop 
Newton,  “  that  -after  so  many  wars,  battles,  and 
sieges ;  after  so  many  rebellions,  massacres,  and  per¬ 
secutions;  after  so  many  years  of  captivity,  slavery, 
and  misery;  they  are  not  “destroyed  utterly,”  and 
though  scattered  among  all  people,  yet  subsist  a  dis¬ 
tinct  people  by  themselves!  Where  is  any  thing  like 
this  to  be  found  in  all  the  histories,  and  in  all  the 
nations  under  the  sun?” 

The  prophecy  goes  on  to  declare,  that  they  should 
be  every  where  in  an  uneasy  condition;  and  should 
not  rest  long  in  any  one  place.  “  And  among  these 
nations  shalt  thou  find  no  ease,  neither  shall  the  sole 
of  thy  foot  have  rest.”  How  exactly  has  this  been 
verified  in  the  case  of  this  unhappy  people,  even  to 
this  day!  There  is  scarcely  a  country  in  Europe 
from  which  they  have  not  been  banished,  at  one  time 
or  another.  To  say  nothing  of  many  previous  scenes 
of  bloodshed  and  banishment,,  of  the  most  shocking 
kind,  through  which  great  multitudes  of  this  devoted 
people  passed  in  Germany,  France,  and  Spain,  in  the 
thirteenth  and  fourteenth  centuries ;  eight  hundred 
thousand  Jews,  are  said  by  the  Spanish  historian,  to 
have  been  banished  from  Spain,  by  Ferdinand  and 
Isabella.  And  how  often,  when  tolerated  by  govern¬ 
ment  they  have  suffered  by  the  tumults  of  the  peo¬ 
ple,  it  is  impossible  to  enumerate. 

The  prophet  declares  that  “  they  should  be  oppress¬ 
ed  and  crushed  alway ;  that  their  sons  and  their 
daughters  should  be  given  to  another  people;  that 
they  should  be  mad  for  the  sight  of  their  eyes,  which 
they  should  see.”  Nothing  has  been  more  common 
in  all  countries  where  the  Jews  have  resided,  than 
to  fine,  fleece,  and  oppress  them,  at  will ;  and  in 
Spain  and  Portugal  their  children  have  been  taken 
from  them  by  order  of  the  government,  to  be  educa- 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  137 

ted  in  the  Popish  religion.  The  instances  in  which 
their  oppressions  have  driven  them  to  madness  and 
desperation,  are  too  numerous  to  be  stated  in  detail,  i 

6.  Finally,  it  is  foretold  by  Moses,  “  That  they 
should  become  an  astonishment,  a  proverb,  and  a 
by-word,  among  all  nations;  and  that  their  plagues, 
should  be  wonderful,”  even  great  plagues,  and  of 
long  continuance.  In  every  country  the  Jews  are 
hated  and  despised.  They  have  been  literally  “  a 
proverb  and  a  by-word.”  Mohammedans,  Heathens, 
and  Christians,  however  they  may  differ  in  other 
things,  have  been  agreed  in  vilifying,  abusing,  and 
persecuting  the  Jews.  Surely  the  judgments  visited 
on  this  peculiar  people,  have  been  wonderful  and  of 
long  continuance.  For  nearly  eighteen  hundred  years, 
they  have  been  in  this  miserable  state  of  banishment, 
lispersion,  and  persecution. 

The  prophecy  of  Isaiah  respecting  the  restoration 
of  the  Jews  to  their  land  after  seventy  years  captivi¬ 
ty,  is  very  remarkable.  Cyrus  is  designated  by  name, 
not  only  as  the  conqueror  of  Babylon,  but  as  the 
restorer  of  Israel  and  rebuilder  of  Jerusalem.  “That 
saith  of  Cyrus,  he  is  my  shepherd,  and  shall  perform 
all  my  pleasure;  even  saying  to  Jerusalem,  thou  shalt 
be  built ;  and  to  the  temple  thy  foundations  shall  be 
laid.”*  We  are  informed  by  Josephus,  that  when 
Cyrus  had  got  possession  of  Babylon,  the  predictions 
concerning  himself  were  made  known  to  him,  and 
that  he  was  struck  with  admiration  at  the  manifest 
divinity  of  the  writing.  This  will  account  for  the 
kindness  of  this  prince  to  the  children  of  Israel,  and 
the  opportunity  which  he  gave  them  to  return  to 
their  own  land,  and  the  facilities  which  he  granted 
for  the  restoration  of  the  temple.  Indeed,  it  is  certain 
from  what  is  said  in  Ezra,  that,  by  some  means, 
Cyrus  knew  that  God  had  appointed  him  to  rebuild 
the  temple  for  there  it  is  written,  “  That  the  Lord 
stirred  up  the  spirit  of  Cyrus,  king  of  Persia,  that  he 
made  a  proclamation  throughout  all  his  kingdom, 
and  put  it  also  in  writing,  saying,  Thus  saith  Cyrus 

*  Isa.  xliv.  28. 

12* 


138 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


the  king  of  Persia,  the  Lord  God  of  heaven  hath 
given  me  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  earth  and  He  hath 

CHARGED  ME  TO  BUILD  A  HOUSE  IN  JERUSALEM  WHICH 

is  in  Judah.”  * 

He  then  gave  liberty  and  encouragement  to  the 
people  of  God  to  engage  in  this  pious  enterprise,  and 
to  receive  pecuniary  aid  from  all  who  were  disposed 
to  co-operate  in  this  good  work.  And,  as  the  sacred 
vessels  of  the  temple  had  been  brought  to  -Babylon, 
by  Nebuchadnezzar,  these  Cyrus  brought  forth  and 
delivered  to  the  proper  officer,  to  be  brought  up  from 
Babylon  to  Jerusalem. 

“  What  nation,”  says  the  distinguished  writer  al¬ 
ready  quoted,  “  hath  subsisted  as  a  distinct  people  in 
their  own  country,  so  long  as  these  have  done  in  their 
dispersion,  into  all  countries?  And  what  a  standing 
miracle  is  this  exhibited  to  the  view  and  observation 
of  the  whole  world!”  “  Here  are  instances  of  pro¬ 
phecies  delivered  above  three  thousand  years  ago, 
and  yet,  as  we  see,  fulfilling  in  the  world,  at.  this 
very  time;  and  what  stronger  proof  can  we  desire  of 
the  divine  legation  of  Moses?  How  these  instances 
may  affect  others,  I  know  not,  but  for  myself  I  must 
acknowledge,  they  not  only  convince,  but  amaze  and 
astonish  me  beyond  expression.” 


CHAPTER  X. 


PROPHECIES  RELATING  TO  NINEVEH,  BABYLON,  TYRE,  &C. 

The  walls  of  Nineveh,  the  capital  of  Assyria,  are 
said  to  have  been  a  hundred  feet  in  height,  sixty 
miles  in  compass,  and  defended  by  fifteen  hundred 
towers,  each  two  hundred  feet  high.  Diodorus  Sicu¬ 
lus  relates,  that  the  king  of  Assyria  after  the  complete 
discomfiture  of  his  army,  confided  in  an  old  prophecy 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


139 


that  Nineveh  would  not  be  taken  unless  the  river 
should  become  the  enemy  of  the  city;  that  after  an 
ineffectual  siege  of  two  years,  the  river,  swollen  with 
long  continued  and  tempestuous  torrents,  inundated 
part  of  the  city,  and  threw  down  the  wall  for  the 
space  of  twenty  furlongs ;  and  that  the  king,  deeming 
that  the  prediction  was  accomplished,  despaired  of 
his  -safety,  and  erected  an  immense  funeral  pile,  on 
which  he  heaped  his  wealth,  and  with  which  him¬ 
self,  his  household,  and  palace  were  consumed.* 
The  book  of  Nahum  was  avowedly  prophetic  of  the 
destruction  of  Nineveh;  and  it  is  there  foretold,  “that 
the  gates  of  the  river  shall  be  opened,  and  the  palace 
shall  be  dissolved — Nineveh  of  old,  like  a  pool  of 
water — with  an  overflowing  flood  he  will  make  an 
utter  end  of  the  place  thereof.”  The  other  predic¬ 
tions  of  the  prophet  are  as  literally  described  by  the 
historian.  He  relates,  that  the  king  of  Assyria,  ela¬ 
ted  with  his  former  victories,  and  ignorant  of  the 
revolt  of  the  Bactrians,  had  abandoned  himself  to 
scandalous  inaction;  had  appointed  a  time  of  fes¬ 
tivity;  and  supplied  his  soldiers  with  abundance  of 
wine;  and  that  the  general  of  the  enemy  apprized 
by  deserters,  of  their  negligence  and  drunkenness 
attacked  the  Assyrian  army  while  abandoned  to  revel¬ 
ling,  destroyed  a  great  part  of  them,  and  drove  the 
rest  into  the  city.  The  words  of  the  prophet;  were 
hereby  verified.  “  While  they  were  folden  together 
as  thorns,  and  while  they  are  drunken  as  drunkards, 
they  shall  be  devoured  as  stubble  fully  dry.”  Much 
spoil  was  promised  to  the  enemy,  “Take  the  spoil  of 
silver,  take  the  spoil  of  gold;  for  there  is  no  end  of 
the  store  and  glory,  out  of  all  the  pleasant  furniture.” 
Accordingly  the  historian  affirms,  that  many  talents 
of  gold  and  silver  preserved  from  the  fire,  were  car¬ 
ried  to  Ecbatana..  The  prophet  declares,  that  the 
city  was  not  only  to  be  destroyed  by  an  overflowing 
flood,  but  the  fire  was  also  to  devour  it;  which 
exactly  agrees  with  the  account  of  the  historian 
The  utter  and  perpetual  destruction  of  the  city  was 

*  Diod.  Sic.  Lib.  ii.  p.  32,  33.  J 


140 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


distinctly  predicted,  “  The  Lord  will  make  an  utter 
end  of  the  place  thereof.  Affliction  shall  not  rise  up 
the  second  time,  she  is  empty,  void  and  waste.  The 
Lord  will  stretch  out  his  hand  against  the  north  and 
destroy  Assyria,  and  will  make  Nineveh  a  desolation, 
and  dry  like  a  wilderness.  How  is  she  become  a 
desolation,  a  place  for  beasts  to  lie  down  in.”  In  the 
second  century,  Lucian,  who  was  born  on  the  banks 
of  the  Euphrates,  testified,  that-  Nineveh  was  utterly 
perished — that  there  was  no  vestige  of  it  remain¬ 
ing — and  that  none  could  tell  where  it  was  once 
situated.  A  late  traveller  who  has  visited  that  coun¬ 
try,  testifies,  that  neither  bricks,  stones,  nor  other 
materials  of  building,”  are  now  to  be  seen;  but  the 
ground  is,  in  many  places,  grown  over  with  grass, 
and  such  elevations  are  observable,  as  resemble  the 
mounds  left  by  the  intrenchments  and  fortifications 
of  ancient  Roman  camps;  and  the  appearances  of 
other  mounds  and  ruins  less  marked  than  even  these 
extending  for  ten  miles  and  widely  spread,  and  seem¬ 
ing  to  be  the  wreck  of  former  buildings,  show  that 
Nineveh  is  left  without  any  monument  of  royalty, 
without  any  token  whatever  of  its  splendour  or 
wealth;  that  it  is  indeed  a  desolation,  “empty,  void, 
and  waste;”  its  very  ruins  perished,  and  less  than 
the  wreck  of  what  it  was.  “Such  an  utter  ruin,”  says 
Bishop  Newton,  “has  been  made  of  it:  and  such  is 
the  truth  of  the  divine  predictions.” 

**  t  \ 

BABYLON. 

The  prophecies  respecting  the  taking  of  Babylon, 
its  utter  destruction,  and  the  complete  desolation 
which  should  reign  where  this  proud  city  once  stood, 
have  been  remarkably  fulfilled.  Our  limits  will  only 
admit  of  the  selection  of  a  few  particulars  out  of 
many;  but  for  more  minute  and  extended  informa¬ 
tion  on  this  interesting  subject,  the  reader  is  referred 
to  the  works  of  Bishop  Newton,  and  the  Rev.  Alex¬ 
ander  Keith,  on  Prophecy,  where  he  will  meet  with 
full  satisfaction,  and  to  which  we  acknowledge  our- 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


141 


selves  indebted  for  the  substance  of  what  is  here 
introduced. 

The  very  nations  by  whom  Babylon  was  to  be 
taken  and  destroyed,  are  predicted  by  name  by  the 
prophet  Jeremiah.  “  Go  up,  0  Elam,  (this  was  the 
ancient  name  of  Persia,)  besiege,  0  Media.  The 
Lord  hath  raised  up  the  spirit  of  the  kings  of  the 
Medes;  for  his  device  is  against  Babylon  to  destroy 
it.”* 

And  Isaiah  says,  “  Babylon  is  fallen,  is  fallen;  and 
all  the  graven  images  of  her  gods  he  hath  broken 
unto  the  ground.”!  Thus  saith  the  Lord  “  that  saith 
unto  the  deep,  Be  dry;  and  I  will  dry  up  thy  rivers: 
that  saith  of  Cyrus,  he  is  my  shepherd,’and  shall  per¬ 
form  all  my  pleasure.  And  I  will  loose  the  loins 
of  kings,  to  open  before  him  the  two-leaved  gates — ■ 
and  the  gates  shall  not  be  shut.”!  “  Thus  saith  the 
Lord  to  Cyrus  his  anointed,  to  subdue  nations  before 
him.”  This  prediction  of  Isaiah,  in  which  Cyrus  is 
named,  must  have  been  uttered  at  least  two  hundred 
years  before  he  was  born,  and  when  the  Persians 
were  an  obscure  and  inconsiderable  nation. 

A  confederacy  having  been  formed  between  the 
Medes  and  Persians,  and  Cyrus  having  in  person 
taken  the  command  of  the  Persians,  and  having  dis¬ 
ciplined  them  with  consummate  skill,  and  inspired 
them  with  heroic  courage,  joined  his  uncle  Cyaxares, 
(by  Daniel  called  Darius  the  Mede,)  and  their  united 
forces  having  conquered  the  Armenians,  the  Hyrca- 
nians,  the  Lydians,  the  Cappadocians,  and  other  allies 
of  the  king  of  Babylon;  and  having  so  treated  all 
these  conquered  nations  as  to  conciliate  their  friend¬ 
ship,  and  add  their  forces  to  their  own,  they  marched 
towards  the  city  of  Babylon. 

Although  Cyrus  commenced  his  military  career 
with  a  small  army  of  Persians,  yet  by  conquest  and 
wise  policy,  his  army  had  become  exceedingly  nu¬ 
merous  before  he  reached  the  famous  city.  But  what 
could  be  done  by  courage  or  military  skill  against  a 
city  so  defended  on  every  side?  This  consummate 

*  Jcr.  li.  f  Isa.  xxi.  9.  t  Isa.  xliv.  27,  28. 


142 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 


general,  as  soon  as  he  had  arrived  on  the  ground 
with  his  army,  made  it  his  first  business,  in  company 
with  some  of  his  chief  officers,  to  ride  entirely  round 
the  walls,  and  to  ascertain  whether  there  was  any 
weak  point  where  an  assault  might  successfully  be 
made.  But  he  found  every  part  fully  secured,  so 
that  there  seemed  no  possibility  of  taking  the  city 
but  by  a  long  siege.  He  therefore  sat  down  before 
it,  and  dug  a  trench  entirely  around  the  walls,  and 
towers  were  erected,  and  every  other  preparation 
made  for  a  regular  siege.  Thus,  in  the  prophecy,  it 
is  said,  44  They  camped  against  it  round  about.  They 
put  themselves  in  array  against  Babylon  around 
about.  They  set  themselves  in  array  against  Baby¬ 
lon,  every  man  put  in  array.” 

Another  important  circumstance  distinctly  noticed 
in  the  prophecy,  is,  the  cowardice  of  the  Babylonians. 
Formerly,  her  armies  were  a  terror  to  the  whole 
earth,  and  nothing  could  withstand  their  fierce  cour¬ 
age.  But  now,  faint-heartedness  had  come  over 
them.  44  The  mighty  men  of  Babylon  have  forborne 
to  fight.  They  have  remained  in  their  holds.  Their 
might  hath  failed,  they  became  as  women.”*  Their 
timidity  was  manifest  in  their  shutting  themselves 
up;  and  all  the  challenges  of  their  enemies  could  not 
provoke  them  to  come  out  and  meet  them  in  the  open 
field.  Xenophon  relates,  that  Cyrus  challenged  the 
king  of  Babylon  to  decide  the  contest  by  single  com¬ 
bat,  which  he  declined.  The  people  within  the  walls, 
though  very  numerous,  made  no  sallies  from  their 
gates ;  nor  did  they  use  any  efforts  to  disperse  or  an¬ 
noy  the  besiegers.  Literally, 44  they  remained  in  their 
hold,  and  the  hands  of  the  king  of  Babylon  waxed 
feeble.” 

Cyrus,  as  we  have  said,  found  every  thing  secure 
against  assault;  for  what  could  battering  rams,  or 
other  engines  of  war  accomplish  against  walls  which 
were  thirty,  or,  as  some  assert,  fifty  feet  in  thickness  ? 
He  was,  therefore,  not  a  little  perplexed  until  the 
thought  occurred,  that  an  entrance  might  possibly 

*  Jeremiah  li. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  145 

be  obtained  by  turning  out  of  its  channel  the  rivei 
Euphrates,  which  flowed  through  the  city.  This 
hazardous  enterprise  as  a  last  resort  was  determined 
on,  and  the  work  was  commenced,  but  the  design 
wras  carefully  concealed  from  the  besieged ;  for,  as 
Herodotus  observes,  if  they  had  had  the  least  inti¬ 
mation  of  the  device,  or  if  they  had  discovered  the 
Persians  while  passing  through,  they  could  not  only 
have  prevented  its  execution,  but  have  destroyed  the 
whole  army  of  Cyrus  while  pent  up  within  the  chan¬ 
nel  of  the  river.  All  that  was  necessary  to  prevent 
the  Persians  from  entering  \vas,  to  close  the  gates 
which  gave  entrance  to  theeity  through  the  embank¬ 
ment  built  upon  both  sides  of  the  river.  To  guard 
against  the  danger  of  discovery,  Cyrus  selected  for 
the  execution  of  this  important  but  dangerous  enter¬ 
prise,  the  season  of  a  great  Babylonish  festival,  on 
which  occasion  he  knew  the  whole  population  gave 
themselves  up  to  revelling  and  drunkenness.  The 
river  was  a  full  quarter  of  a  mile  wide,  and  twelve 
feet  deep,  but  there  was  an  artificial  lake  in  the 
neighbourhood,  prepared  to  receive  the  surplus  wa¬ 
ters,  when  it  overflowed  its  banks,  or  when  for  any 
other  reason  it  was  desirable  to  diminish  the  waters 
of  the  river.  The  entrance  of  this  canal  was  en¬ 
larged,  and  the  great  trench  dug  round  the  walls  by 
the  army  of  Cyrus,  was  so  connected  with  the  river 
above  the  town,  that  this  also  was  capable  of  con¬ 
taining  a  large  body  of  water.  Moreover,  the  coun¬ 
try  was  exceedingly  low  and  flat;  so  that  the  water, 
if  it  could  once  be  diverted  from  its  usual  channel, 
would  readily  spread  itself  in  all  directions.  The 
scheme  succeeded  to  their  most  sanguine  expecta¬ 
tion.  The  channel  of  the  river  was  left  nearly  dry 
by  the  subsiding  of  the  water,  and  the  army  of  Cyrus 
entered  by  night.  One  detachment  was  placed  where 
the  river  entered  the  city,  and  another  where  it  left 
it ;  and  the  Persian  army  entered  so  silently,  and 
the  inhabitants  were  so  completely  drowned  in  their 
drunken  revels,  that  no  alarm  was  sqpnded,  and  no 
care  had  been  taken  to  close  the  gates  leading  to  the 


144 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


river,  no  danger  being  apprehended  on  that  side 
So  completely  were  the  Babylonians  surprised,  that 
Cyrus  had  reached  the  royal  palace  before  a  messen¬ 
ger  arrived  to  tell  the  king  that  the  city  was  taken. 
The  noise  of  the  invading  army,  at  first,  was  not  dis¬ 
tinguished  from  the  mad  tumult  of  the  rioters.  Even 
the  guards  stationed  around  the  palace  were  found 
intoxicated,  and  slain;  when. the  Persians  rushed 
into  the  splendid  hall,  where  Belshazzar  and  his 
thousand  lords,  and  wives,  and  concubines,  had  been 
drinking  out  of  the  sacred  vessels  of  the  Lord’s  house, 
which  had  been  impiously  brought  forth  on  this  oc¬ 
casion.  But  their  profane  mirth  had  already  been 
arrested  before  the  arrival  of  the  victorious  Persians, 
by  the  appearance  of  a  hand,  writing  certain  words 
in  a  strange  character  on  the  wall.  This  had  pro¬ 
duced  the  utmost  consternation  in  all  the  assembly; 
although  none  could  decipher  the  writing,  until  Daniel 
was  brought  in,  who  quickly  denounced  the  fatal 
destiny  of  the  monarch,  and  the  overthrow  of  his 
kingdom;  “And  in  that  night  was  Belshazzar,  the 
king  of  the  Chaldeans,  slain.” 

How  exactly  the  events,  described  above,  were 
predicted,  will  be  at  once  seen  by  the  following  quo¬ 
tations  from  the  prophets. 

“  I  will  dry  up  thy  sea,  and  make  thy  springs  dry 
— that  saith  to  the  deep,  Be  dry,  I  will  dry  tip  thy 
rivers.” 

“And  one  post  did  run  to  meet  another,  and  one 
messenger  to  meet  another,  to  show  the  king  of 
Babylon  that  his  city  is  taken  at  the  end,  and  that 
the  passages  are  shut.” 

“  But  a  snare  was  laid  for  Babylon.  It  was  taken, 
and  it  was  not  aware.  How  is  the  praise  of  the 
whole  earth  surprised !  For  thou  hast  trusted  in  thy 
wickedness,  and  in  thy  wisdom,  and  thy  knowledge 
it  hath  perverted  thee ;  therefore  shall  evil  come  upon 
thee,  and  thou  shalt  not  know  whence  it  ariseth;  and 
mischief  shall  come  upon  thee,  and  thou  shalt  not  be 
able  to  put  it  o£f — none  shall  save  thee.” 

“  In  their  heat  I  will  make  their  feasts,  and  I  will 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  145 

make  them  drunken,  that  they  may  rejoice,  and  sleep 
a  perpetual  sleep,  and  not  wake,  saith  the  Lord.  I 
will  make  drunken  her  princes  and  her  wise  men, 
her  captains  and  her  rulers,  and  her  mighty  men, 
and  they  shall  sleep  a  perpetual  sleep.” 

“  The  gates  (z.  e.  those  from  the  river  to  the  city) 
were  not  shut.  The  loins  of  kings  were  loosed  to 
open  before  Cyrus  the  two-leaved  gates.” * 

The  king  hearing  a  noise  and  tumult  without,  sent 
some  to  see  whence  it  arose:  but  no  sooner  were  the 
gates  of  the  palace  opened,  than  the  Persians  rushed 
in.  “  The  king  of  Babylon  heard  the  report  of  them. 
Anguish  took  hold  of  him.”  He  and  all  about  him 
perished.  God  had  “  numbered  his  kingdom  and 
finished  it.”  It  was  “  divided  and  given  to  the 
Medes  and  Persians.” 

The  multitude  of  soldiers  who  now  entered  the 
city,  and  the  slaughter  of  the  citizens  in  the  streets, 
are  exactly  foretold.  “I  will  fill  thee  with  men  as 
with  caterpillars.  Her  young  men  shall  fall  in  the 
streets,  and  all  her  men  of  war  shall  be  cut  off  in 
that  day.” 

The  number  of  the  Persian  army,  which  was  re¬ 
viewed  immediately  after  the  capture  of  the  city,  is 
said  by  Herodotus  to  have  amounted  to  one  hundred 
and  twenty  thousand  horse,  six  thousand  chariots  of 
war,  and  six  hundred  thousand  infantry. 

Cyrus  issued  a  proclamation  that  the  people  should 
remain  in  their  houses.,  with  strict  orders  to  slay  every 
person  who  should  be  found  in  “the  streets.” 

Cyrus  now  became  master  of  all  the  hidden  trea¬ 
sures  of  Babylon.  “The  treasures  of  darkness  and 
hidden  riches  of  secret  places  being  given  into  his 
hand;”  that  he  might  know  “that  the  Lord,  which 
had  called  him  by  his  name,  was  the  God  of  Israel.” 

From  the  time  of  the  first  capture  of  this  famous 
city  by  Cyrus,  her  glory  began  to  fade.  God  had 
predicted  her  downfall,  and  his  word  never  fails. 
After  its  first  conquest  it  was,  according  to  Herodo¬ 
tus,  reduced  from  an  imperial  to  a  tributary  city; 

*  Jeremiah  li. 

13 


146 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


which  seems  to  be  foretold  by  the  prophet,  when  he 
says — “Come  down  and  sit  in  the  dust,  0  virgin 
daughter  of  Babylon — sit  on  the  ground,  there  is  no 
throne,  0  daughter  of  the  Chaldeans.” 

The  next  step  towards  the  downfall  of  this  famous 
city  was  after  the  rebellion  against  Darius.  When 
he  captured  the  city,  he  ordered  the  height  of  the 
walls  to  be  reduced,  and  all  the  gates  to  be  destroyed. 
To  which  the  prophet  alludes,  in  express  terms: — 
“  The  wall  of  Babylon  shall  fall — her  walls  shall  be 
thrown  down.” 

Xerxes,  after  his  return  from  his  unfortunate  Gre¬ 
cian  expedition,  entered  the  city  and  rilled  its  most 
valuable  and  sacred  treasures,  laid  up  in  the  temple 
of  Belus.  This  the  prophet  Jeremiah  had  foretold. 
“  I  will  punish  Bel  in  Babylon,  and  I  will  bring  out 
of  his  mouth  that  which  he  has  swallowed  up.  I 
will  do  judgment  on  the  graven  images  of  Babylon.” 

No  efforts  made  by  the  conquerors  of  Babylon  to 
restore  her  glory,  or  even  to  prevent  her  decay,  were 
at  all  successful.  Cyrus  made  Babylon  his  usual 
place  of  residence,  but  his  successors  preferred  other 
cities:  and  when  Alexander  conquered  Babylon,  it 
was  fully  his  purpose  to  restore  Babylon  to  her  pris¬ 
tine  glory;  but  the  counsel  of  Jehovah  was  adverse. 
The  prophet  had  long  before  signified  that  all  such 
attempts  would  prove  ineffectual.  “  Take  balm  for 
her  pain,  if  so  he  that  she  may  be  healed.  We  would 
have  healed  Babylon,  but  she  is  not  healed.”  The 
proximate  cause  of  the  rapid  decline  of  Babylon  was 
twofold ;  first,  the  turning  of  the  river  inundated  the 
surrounding  country  and  filled  it  with  stagnant  pools; 
secondly,  the  building  of  another  city  in  the  neigh¬ 
bourhood,  drew  off  multitudes  of  inhabitants,  who 
transferred  their  residence  and  wealth  from  the  old 
to  the  new  city.  Babylon  also  was  oppressed  with 
some  of  the  most  cruel  tyrants  that  ever  ruled  over 
any  city.  One  of  these,  named  Humerus,  who  lived 
about  one  hundred  and  thirty  years  before  Christ, 
reduced  many  of  the  inhabitants  to  slavery  on  the 
slightest  pretexts,  burned  the  forum  and  some  of  the 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


147 


temples,  and  banished  many  of  the  people  into  Me¬ 
dia.  In  foresight  of  such  scenes,  the  prophet  says, 
“  They  shall  remove,  they  shall  depart  both  man  and 
beast.” 

The  cruelty  of  the  conquerors  of  Babylon  is  strong¬ 
ly  portrayed  by  the  inspired  pen.  “  They  are  cruel 
both  in  anger  and  fierce  wrath,  to  lay  the  land  deso¬ 
late.”  This  has  been  in  an  eminent  degree  verified, 
in  the  Persians  and  Medes,  the  Macedonians,  the 
Parthians,  the  Syrians,  the  Romans,  and  the  Sara¬ 
cens;  all  of  whom,  in  their  turn,  by  their  cruel  anger 
and  fierce  wrath,  assisted  to  render  desolate  this  once 
“  golden  city,”  and  these  once  beautiful  and  fertile 
regions.  v 

“A  sword  is  upon  the  Chaldeans.  A  sound  of 
battle  is  in  the  land  and  great  destruction.  I  will 
kindle  a  fire  in  his  cities,  and  it  shall  burn  all  round 
about  him.  And  Chaldea  shall  be  a  spoil,  all  that 
spoil  her  shall  be  satisfied,  saith  the  Lord.  A  sword 
is  upon  her  treasures,  and  they  shall  be  robbed.  0 
thou  that  dwellest  upon  many  waters,  abundant  in 
treasures,  thine  end  is  come.” 

The  prophet’s  description  of  the  utter  desolation 
of  Babylon  could  scarcely  have  been  more  vivid  and 
exact  if  he  had  been  present  to  view  the  scene. 
“  I  will  punish  the  land  of  the  Chaldeans,  and  will 
make  it  perpetual  desolations;  cut  off  the  sower  from 
Babylon  and  him  that  handleth  the  sickle  in  time  of 
harvest.  A  drought  is  upon  her  waters,  and  they 
shall  be  dried  up.  Behold  the  hinclermost  of  the 
nations,  a  dry  land  and  a  desert.  Her  cities  are  a 
desolation,  a  dry  land  and  a  wilderness ;  a  land 
where  no  man  dwelleth;  neither  doth  the  son  of  man 
pass  by  there.  I  will  send  unto  Babylon  fanners 
that  will  fan  her,  and  empty  her  land.  The  land 
shall  tremble  and  sorrow;  for  every  purpose  of  the 
Lord  shall  be  performed' against  Babylon,  to  make 
the  land  of  Babylon  a  desolation  without  an  inhabi¬ 
tant.”* 

The  decline  of  this  famous  city  was  gradual  but 

*  Jeremiah  ii. 


I 


148  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

constant.  In  the  second  century  of  the  Christian  era 
nothing  remained  but  the  walls,  and  in  the  fourth 
century,  these  Avere  repaired  to  serve  as  an  enclo¬ 
sure  or  park  for  wild  beasts,  and  Babylon  became  a 
hunting  ground  for  the  kings  of  Persia.  Under  the 
Saracens  the  desolation  became  complete,  and  for 
many  ages  past  the  following  prediction  has  been 
literally  fulfilled.  “  No  man  dwelleth  there,  and  no 
son  of  man  passeth  by.  Neither  shall  the  Arabian 
pitch  his  tent  there;  neither  shall  the  shepherds  make 
their  folds  there.”  The  only  remains  of  the  former 
city  are  heaps  of  ruins  and  mounds  of  half  decayed 
bricks;  in  exact  conformity  with  the  prediction  of 
Jeremiah.  “  Babylon  shall  become  heaps.  Cast  her 
up  as  heaps.  Let  nothing  of  her  be  left.  Babylon  is 
fallen — is  cut  down  to  the  ground.  Her  foundations 
are  fallen.  It  shall  never  be  inhabited  from  genera¬ 
tion  to  generation.” 

The  following  are  statements  made  by  recent  tra 
vellers.  “Qur  path,”  says  Mignan,  “lay  through  the 
great  mass  of  ruined  heaps  on  the  site  of  c  shrunken 
Babylon.’  And  I  am  perfectly  incapable  of  convey¬ 
ing  an  adequate  idea  of  the  dreary  lonely  nakedness, 
that  appeared  before  ns.”  Porter  remarks,  “  that  a 
silence  profound  as  the  grave,  reigns  throughout  the 
ruins.  Babylon  is  now  a  silent  scene,  a  sublime 
solitude.”  According  to  Rauwolf,  even  as  early  as 
the  sixteenth  century,  there  was  not  within  the 
limits  of  ancient  Babylon  a  single  human  habitation. 
“  The  eye,”  says  he,  “  wanders  over  a  barren  desert, 
in  Avhich  the  ruins  are  nearly  the  only  indication, 
that  it  ever  has  been  inhabited.”  “It  is  impossible,” 
says  Keppel,  “  to  behold  the  scene,  and  not  be  re¬ 
minded  how  exactly  the  predictions  of  Isaiah  and 
Jeremiah  have  been  fulfilled.”  As  the  wild  Arabs 
inhabit  the  Avilderness,  and  often  visit  this  region  it 
may  seem  strange  and  improbable  that  they  should 
never  pitch  their  tents  on  the  ruinous  site  of  Baby¬ 
lon;  but  Mignan  informs  us  that  nothing  will  induce 
them  to  remain  all  night  near  the  principal  mound,, 
as  they  have  a  superstitious  belief  that  evil  spirits 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  149 

dwell  there.  He  informs  us,  that  he  "was  accompa¬ 
nied  by  six  Arabs,  well  armed,  and  accustomed  to 
the  desert,  but  no  inducement  could  have  prevailed 
on  them  to  remain  on  the  ground  after  night. 

The  place  is  also  full  of  “  doleful  creatures’5  and 
of  stagnant  pools.  Among  the  ruins,  travellers  inform 
us,  there  are  many  dens  of  wild  beasts.  “  In  most 
of  the  cavities,”  says  Rich,  “  are  numerous  owls  and 
bats.”  On  the  very  mound  supposed  to  have  been 
produced  by  the  ruins  of  the  temple  of  Belus,  Porter 
saw  three  large  lions.  The  hyena  and  the  jackal 
have  also  their  residence  here.-  Who  can  fail  to  see, 
in  these  circumstances,  the  exact  fulfilment  of  that 
prediction — “  Wild  beasts  of  the  desert  shall  be  there, 
and  their  houses  shall  be  full  of  doleful  creatures, 
and  owls  shall  dwell  there,  and  satyrs  shall  dance 
there.”  The  western  bank  of  the  Euphrates  has 
now  disappeared,  and  the  river  having  no  barrier 
freely  overflows  the  adjacent  land,  so  that  on  this 
side  a  large  part  of  the  ruins  of  Babylon  are  inunda¬ 
ted;  and  for  a  great  distance,  even  after  the  river  has 
subsided,  the  whole  country  is  one  continued  swamp, 
which  is  entirely  inaccessible  to  the  traveller.  To 
this  the  prophet  seems  to  have  alluded,  when  he  says, 
“  The  sea  is  come  upon  Babylon.  She  is  covered 
with  the  multitude  of  the  waves  thereof.”  But  that 
which  at  first  view  appears  to  be  incompatible  with 
this  description  is  nevertheless  true.  Babylon  is  de¬ 
scribed  by  the  prophets  as  “  a  dry  land,  a  wilderness, 
and  a  desert.”  But  the  fact  is,  that  while  on  one 
side  of  the  river,  the  site  is  inundated,  on  the  other, 
it  is  exceedingly  dry,  and  a  mere  arid  desert. 

As  far  as  the  light  of  history  reaches,  among  all 
the  structures  ever  reared  by  the  hands  of  men,  the 
temple  of  Belus  seems  to  have  been  the  most  eleva¬ 
ted.  This  temple  was  probably  built  on  the  foun¬ 
dation  of  the  tower  of  Babel,  and  according  to  the 
lowest  computation,  was  higher  than  the  greatest  of 
the  Egyptian  pyramids.  The  highest  mound  now 
among  the  ruins  is  supposed,  by  discerning  travellers, 
to  be  on  the  site  of  this  famous  temple.  This  ruin 

13* 


150 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 


covers  more  ground  than  the  temple  did  when  stand 
ing.  “It  has,”  says  Mignan,  “the  appearance  of  a 
hill  surmounted  with  a  castle.”  This  hill  is  called 
.  by  the  Arabs  Birs  Nimrud.  Of  this  vast  ruin,  Sir 
Robert  Ker  Porter  has  given  a  very  particular  and 
interesting  account.  “  On  the  summit  of  the  hill  are 
immense  fragments  of  brick-work,  of  no  determinate 
figures,  tumbled  together,  and  converted  into  vitrified 
masses.”  Some  of  these  huge  fragments  measure 
twelve  feet  in  height  by  twenty-four  in  circumfer¬ 
ence;  these  fragments  have  been  entirely  preserved, 
while  every  thing  else  is  crumbled  to  dust,  because 
they  have  been  exposed  to  the  action  of  the  fiercest 
fire  ;  they  are  completely  molten. 

The  high  gates  of  the  temple  of  Belus,  which  were 
standing  in  the  time  of  Herodotus,  have  been  burnt 
with  fire.  “  Bel  boweth  down.  Bel  is  confounded. 
The  hand  of  the  Lord  has  been  stretched  .upon  it — • 
it  has  been  rolled  down  from  the  rocks — and  has 
been  made  a  burnt  mountain.”  The  noble  palaces 
of  Babylon,  the  larger  of  which  was  surrounded  by 
three  walls  of  great  extent,  have  entirely  disappear¬ 
ed.  Although  the  strength  of  the  walls  seemed  to 
promise  durability,  and  almost  to  bid  defiance  to  time ; 
yet  now,  of  these  palaces,  the  most  splendid  perhaps 
that  the  world  ever  saw,  nothing  but  the  mere  vesti¬ 
ges  of  the  walls  which  surround  them,  remain.  The 
circumference  of  this  ruin  is  about  half  a  mile,  and 
its  height  one  hundred  and  forty  feet;  but  it-  is  a 
mass  of  confusion,  the  receptacle  of  wild  beasts,  and 
full  of  doleful  creatures.  Wild  beasts  cry  in  the  deso¬ 
late  houses,  “  and  dragons  in  the  pleasant  palaces.” 
“  Venomous  reptiles,”  says  Mignan,  “are  very  nu¬ 
merous  throughout  the  ruins.”  “On-pacing  over  the 
loose  stones,”  says  the  same  writer,  “  and  fragments 
of  brick- work,  which  lay  scattered  through  the  im¬ 
mense  fabric,  and  surveying  the  sublimity  of  the 
ruins,  I  naturally  recurred  to  the  time  when  these 
walls  stood  proudly  in  their  original  splendour;  when 
the  halls  were  the  scenes  of  festive  magnificence,  and 
when  they  resounded  to  the  voices  of  those  whom 


EVIDENCES  OE  CHRISTIANITY.  151 

death  has  long  since  swept  from  the  earth.  This 
very  pile  was  once  the  seat  of  luxury  and  vice,  now 
abandoned  to  decay,  and  exhibiting  a  melancholy 
instance  of  the  retribution  of  heaven.  It  stands  alone. 
The  solitary  habitation  of  the  goat-herd  marks  not 
the  forsaken  site.”  “  Thy  pomp  is  brought  down 
to  the  grave,  and  the  noise  of  the  viols;  the  worms 
are  spread  under  thee,  and  the  worms  cover  thee.” 

In  this  wonderful  city  there  was  nothing  more 
wonderful  than  the  height  and  thickness  of  the  walls. 
They  were  so  broad  that  six  chariots  abreast  could 
be  drawn  on  them,  and  their  original  height  is  said 
to  have  been  three  hundred  and  fifty  feet ;  or  at  the 
lowest  computation  of  the  length  of  the  cubit,  three 
hundred  feet.  Darius,  it  is  true,  lowered  these  walls ; 
but  still  they  were  elevated  above  the  height  of  most 
walls.  Where  are  they  now?  Not  a  vestige  of  them 
any  where  remains.  Two  travellers,  Buckingham 
and  Frederick,  have  both  made  diligent  search  to  find 
some  traces  of  the  wall  of  Babylon.  The  latter  says: 
“  Neither  of  the  wall  or  of  the  ditch  has  been  seen 
the  least  vestige  by  any  modern  traveller.  Within 
twenty-one  miles  distance  along  the  Euphrates,  and 
twelve  miles  across  it  in  breadth,  I  was  unable  to 
perceive  any  thing  that  could  admit  of  my  imagining, 
that  either  a  Wall  or  ditch  had  existed  within  this 
extensive  area.” 

Keppel  relates,  that  he  and  the  party  who  accom¬ 
panied  him,  “  in  common  with  other  travellers,  had 
totally  failed  in  discovering  any  trace  of  the  city 
walls.”  And  he  adds :  “  The  divine  predictions 
against  Babylon  have  been  so  totally  fulfilled  in  the 
appearance  of  the  ruins,  that  I  am  disposed  to  give 
the  fullest  signification  to  the  words  of  Jeremiah: 
The  broad  walls  of  Babylon  shall  be  utterly 

BROKEN.” 

It  was  predicted  that  “  Babylon  should  be  an  aston¬ 
ishment.  Every  one  that  goeth  by  Babylon  shall 
be  astonished.”  How  exactly  this  accords  with  the 
feelings  of  modern'  travellers,  may  be  learned  from 
their  own  language.  Porter  says,  “  I  could  not  but 


152 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


feel  an  indescribable  awe,  in  thus  passing,  as  it  were, 
into  the  gates  of  fallen  Babylon.75  “  I  cannot  por¬ 
tray,77  says  Mignan,  “the  overpowering  sensation  of 
reverential  awe  that  possessed  my  mind,  while  con¬ 
templating  the  extent  and  magnitude  of  ruin  and 
devastation  on  every  side.77  In  another  place  Porter 
adds  the  following  interesting  remarks,  expressive  of 
his  feelings  while  surveying  the  scene.  “  The  whole 
view  was  particularly  solemn.  The  majestic  stream 
of  the  Euphrates,  wandering  in  solitude,  like  a  pilgrim 
monarch,  through  the  silent  ruins  of  his  devastated 
kingdom,  still  appeared  a  noble  river,  under  all  the 
disadvantages  of  its  desert-tracked  course.  Its  banks 
were  hoary  with  reeds:  and  the  gray  osier  willows 
were  yet  there,  on  which  the  captives  of  Israel  hung 
up  their  harps;  and,  while  Jerusalem  was  not,  re¬ 
fused  to  be  comforted.  But  how  is  the  rest  of  the 
scene  changed  since  then!  At  that  time  those  broken 
hills  were  palaces — those  long  undulating  mounds, 
streets.  This  vast  solitude,  filled  with  the  busy  sub¬ 
jects  of  the  proud  daughter  of  the  east.  Now  wasted 
with  misery,  her  habitations  are  not  to  be  found,  and 
for  herself,  ‘  the  worm  is  spread  over  her.7  77 

The  Rev.  Alexander  Keith,  concludes  with  these 
pertinent  remarks:  “Has  not  every  purpose  of  the 
Lord  been  performed  against  Babylon  ?  What  mor¬ 
tal  shall  give  a  negative  answer  to  the  questions  sub¬ 
joined  by  the  author  of  these  very  prophecies?  Who 
hath  declared  this  from  ancient  time?  Who  hath 
told  it  from  that  time?  Have  not  I  the  Lord?  And 
there  is  no  God  beside  me — declaring  the  end  from 
the  beginning,  and  from  ancient  time  the  things  that 
are  not  yet  done.  Saying,  my  counsel  shall  stand, 
and  I  will  do  all  my  pleasure.77  Is  it  possible  there 
can  be  any  attestation  of  the  truth  of  prophecy,  if 
not  witnessed  here?  “The  records  of  the  human 
race,  it  has  been  said  with  truth,  do  not  present  a 
contrast  more  striking  than  that  between  the  pri¬ 
meval  magnificence  of  Babylon,  and  its  long  desola¬ 
tion.  How  few  spots  are  there  on  earth  of  which 
we  have  so  clear  and  faithful  a  picture  as  prophecy 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 


153 


gave  of  fallen  Babylon,  when  no  spot  on  earth  re¬ 
sembled  it  less  than  its  present  desolate,  solitary  site. 
Or  could  any  prophecies  respecting  any  single  place, 
be  more  precise,  or  wonderful,  or  numerous,  or  true; 
or  more  gradually  accomplished  through  many  gene¬ 
rations?” 

TYRE. 

Tyre  is,  another  famous  ancient  city,  which  was 
the  object  of  some  very  particular  and  remarkable 
prophecies,  which  have  been  most  exactly  fulfilled. 
Isaiah  uttered  his  prediction  concerning  Tyre  when 
she  was  in  her  glory,  and  flourishing  in  all  the  pride 
and  luxury,  which  were  sustained  by  the  richest 
commerce  in  the  world,  at  least  a  century  before  any 
danger  threatened  the  place.  The  reason  which  the 
prophet  assigns  for  God’s  judgments  was  the  pride 
of  this  wealthy  city.  “  The  Lord  of  hosts  hath  pur¬ 
posed  it,  to  stain  the  pride  of  all  glory,  and  to  bring 
into  contempt  all  the  honourable  of  the  earth.”  (Isa¬ 
iah  xxiii.  9.)  Ezekiel  employs  three  whole  chapters 
in  describing  the  luxury,  wealth,  commerce  and  de¬ 
struction  of  Tyre.* 

The  following  particulars  are  clearly  included  in 
the  divine  predictions  concerning  Tyre. 

1.  That  this  luxurious  and  populous  city  should  be 
taken  by  the  Chaldeans;  who,  at  the  time  of  the  pro¬ 
phecy,  were  an  inconsiderable  people.  Ezekiel  not 
only  predicts  that  the  ruin  of  this  city  should  be  by 
the  Chaldeans,  but  names  the  prince  by  whom  it 
should  be  taken:  “Thus  saith  the  Lord  God,  I  will 
bring  upon  Tyrus,  Nebuchadnezzar,  king  of  Baby¬ 
lon,  a  king  of  kings,  from  the  north,  with  horses,  and 
with  chariots,  and  with  horsemen.  He  shall  slay  thy 
people  with  the  sword,  and  thy  strong  garrisons  shall 
go  down  to  the  ground.”!  Josephus  informs  us,  that 
Nebuchadnezzar  besieged  Tyre  for  thirteen  years, 
while  Ithobal  reigned  there,  and  for  his  authority 
quotes  Menander  the  Ephesian.  The  Phenician  an- 

j  Ezek.  xxvi,  7 — 11. 


*  Ezek.  xxv  i.  xxvii.  xxviii. 


154 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


nals,  as  Dr.  Pricleaux  has  shown,  agree  exactly  with 
this  account. 

2.  It  was  predicted  that  the  inhabitants  should 
pass  over  the  Mediterranean  sea,  to  the  islands  and 
countries  adjacent.  Isaiah  says,  “  Pass  ye  over  to 
Tarshish,  howl  ye  inhabitants  of  the  isle.*  Arise, 
pass  over  to  Chittim,  there  also  shalt  thou  have  no 
rest.”  Ezekiel  foretells  the  same  thing.  “  The  isles 
that  are  in  the  sea  shall  be  troubled  at  thy  depar¬ 
ture.”  Bishop  Newton  has  shown  from  ancient 
authors,  that  the  Tyrians  planted  colonies  in  many 
places  over  sea,  and  among  them  were  the  cities  of 
Carthage  in  Africa,  and  Tartessus  in  Spain,  which 
last  is  the  Tarshish  of  the  prophets. 

3.  It  was  predicted,  that  after  seventy  years  Tyre 
should  be  restored.  Isaiah  is  express  in  the  mention 
of  this  period.  “And  it  shall  come  to  pass  in  that 
day,  that  Tyre  shall  be  forgotten  for  seventy  years, 
according  to  the  days  of  one  king;”!  in  which  refer¬ 
ence  is  made  to  the  duration  of  the  Chaldean  dynas¬ 
ty,  which  was  to  continue  only  seventy  years.  Jere¬ 
miah  intimates  this  to  be  the  length  of  the  Babylo¬ 
nish  power.  “  These  nations  shall  serve  the  king  of 
Babylon  seventy  years.”f 

4.  It  was' foretold  that  Tyrus,  after  being  restored, 
should  be  destroyed  again.  When  Nebuchadnezzar 
took  the  city,  the  people  took  their  effects  and  went 
into  their  ships,  and  escaped,  with  much  of  their 
wealth;  so  that  God  promised  Egypt  as  a  recom¬ 
pense  for  his  hard  service  and  poor  reward  in  besieg¬ 
ing  Tyre.  When  the  inhabitants  returned,  they  did 
not  build  on  the  old  site,  but  went  to  an  island  sepa¬ 
rated  from  the  main  land  by  a  strait  of  the  sea.  Here 
the  new  city  arose  and  flourished  in  commerce  and 
wealth.  The'  prophets  not  only  foretold  the  over¬ 
throw  of  old  Tyre,  but  of  this  new  city,  built,  as  it 
were,  “  in  the  midst  of  the  sea.”  Isaiah  says,  “  Howl 
ye  inhabitants  of  the  isle.”  Ezekiel,  u  What  city  is 
like  Tyrus,  like  the  destroyed  in  the  midst  of  the 

*  Isa.  xxiii.  6.  t  Jer.  xxv.  11,  12. 

t  Isa  xxiii.  15 — 17. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  155 

sea.*  Zechariah,  who  had  lived  long  after  the  first 
destruction,  and  must  refer  to  the  second,  says,  “  And 
Tyrus  did  build  himself  a  strong  hold,  and  heaped  up 
silver  as  the  dust,  and  fine  gold  as  the  mire  of  the 
streets.  Behold  the  Lord  will  cast  her  out,  and  he 
will  smite  her  power  in  the  sea,  and  she  shall  be 
devoured  with  fire.”t  This  new  city  was  truly  a 
strong  hold,  for  not  only  was  the  sea  a  defence,  but 
her  walls  were  one  hundred  and  fifty  feet  in  height. 
Ezekiel  also  plainly  predicts,  that  the  second  destruc¬ 
tion  of  Tyre  should  be  by  fire.  “  I  will  bring  forth 
a  fire  from  the  midst  of  thee,  and  it  shall  devour  thee, 
and  I  will  bring  thee  to  ashes  on  the  earth  in  the 
sight  of  all  them  that  behold  thee.”  Accordingly, 
Alexander  the  Great  besieged  and  took  the  city,  and 
set  it  on  fire.  This  is  expressly  asserted  by  Quintus 
Curtius.f 

For  a  while,  the  insular  situation  of  Tyre  and  her 
command  of  the  sea,  hindered  the  approach  of  Alex¬ 
ander’s  army  to  the  walls;  but  he  took  the  stones  and 
rubbish  of  the  old  city,  and  made  a  causeway  across 
the  arm  of  the  sea  which  lay  between  the  island  and 
the  continent;  thus  fulfilling  the  prophecy  of  Ezekiel, 
“They  shall  lay  thy  stones,  and  thy  timber,  and  thy 
dust  in  the  midst  of  the  water-.”  §  This  was  a  work 
of  immense  labour,  and  occupied  his  army  for  seven 
months.  On  this  occasion  also,  the  Tyrians  betook 
themselves  to  their  ships^  and  fled  across  the  sea. 
Both  Diodorus  Siculus,  and  Quintus  Curtius,  testify, 
that  during  the  siege,  they  sent  away  their  wives  and 
children  to  Carthage;  and  when  the  city  was  taken, 
the  Sidonians  contrived  to  carry  off  fifteen  thousand 
persons  in  their  ships.  And  they  were  happy  who 
thus  escaped,  for  the  conqueror  exercised  unbounded 
cruelties  upon  such  as  remained.  Eight  thousand 
were  slain  in  taking  the  city,  two  thousand  were 
crucified,  and  thirty  thousand  sold  for  slaves. 

Although  Tyre  was  again  rebuilt,  and  for  a  con¬ 
siderable  time  flourished;  yet  the  unchangeable  de- 

*  Ezek.  xxvii.  32,  %  L.  4.  c.  3. 

t  Zech.  viii.  1.  §  Ezek.  xxvi.  12. 


156 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 


cree  of  the  Almighty  had  been  published  and  record¬ 
ed  by  the  prophets,  that  this  once  proud  city,  the 
mistress  of  the  sea,  should  become  a  perfect  desola¬ 
tion.  Ezekiel,  who  has  given  so  vivid  and  so  par¬ 
ticular  a  description  of  the  wealth  and  commerce  of 
Tyrus,  and  of  the  pride  of  her  kings  and  merchants, 
also  furnishes  the  most  exact  prediction  of  her  ruin 
and  utter  desolation. 

“  Thus  saith  the  Lord  God,  behold  I  am  against 
thee,  0  Tyrus,  and  will  cause  many  nations  to  come 
up  against  thee,  as  the  sea  causeth  his  waves  to  come 
up,  and  they  shall  destroy  the  walls  of  Tyrus  and 
break  down  her  towers.  I  will  also  scrape  her  dust 
from  her,  and  make  her  as  the  top  of  a  rock.  It 
shall  be  a  place  for  the  spreading  of  nets  in  the  midst 
of  the  sea,  for  I  have  spoken  it  saith  the  Lord.”  And 
to  show  the  absolute  certainty  of  this  total  desolation 
of  Tyre,  he  repeats  what  was  last  mentioned  in  the 
fourteenth  verse.  “  I  will  make  thee  like  the  top  of 
a  rock,  thou  shalt  be  a  place  to  spread  nets  upon; 
thou  shalt  be  built  no  more;  for  I  have  spoken  it, 
saith  the  Lord  God.  And  again,  I  will  make  thee  a 
terror,  and  thou  shalt  be  no  more,  though  thou  be 
sought  for,  thou  shalt  never  be  found  again,  saith  the 
Lord  'God.” 

Now,  to  show  how  exactly  this  is  fulfilled,  let  us 
hear  what  account  modern  travellers  give  of  this 
famous  city. 

Cotovicus,  a  Dutch  traveller,  who  visited  Syria  in 
1 5 9S,  writes,  “  that  this  city  so  often  restored  after 
being  overthrown,  now  at  length  appears  to  be 
utterly  ruined;  so  that  it  has  ceased  to  be  any  longer 
a  city,  and  only  some  inconsiderable  vestiges  of  her 
former  ruins  are  now  visible.  *  If  you  except  a  few 
arches  and  baths,  and  some  ruined  Avails,  and  col¬ 
lapsed  towers,  and  mere  rubbish,  there  is  now  no¬ 
thing  of  Tyre  to  be  discerned.”  And  then  he  refers 
to  the  prophecy  of  Ezekiel. 

Dr.  Shaw  visited  Tyre,  but  could  find  nothing 
like  a  port  or  secure  harbour  any  where  in  the  neigh¬ 
bourhood.  But  Maundrell’s  account  is  the  most 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  15~ 

exact  and  striking.  “  This  city,  standing  in  the  sea, 
on  a  peninsula,  at  a  distance,  promises  something 
very  magnificent ;  but  when  you  come  nearer,  you 
find  no  similitude  of  that  glory  for  which  it  was  so 
renowned  in  ancient  times,  and  which  the  prophet 
Ezekiel  describes  in  the  26th,  27th,  and  28th  chap¬ 
ters  of  his  prophecy.  On  the  north  side,  it  has  an 
old  ungarrisoned  Turkish  castle,  besides  which  you 
see  nothing  hut  a  mere  Babel  of  broken  walls,  pil¬ 
lars,  vaults,  &c.,  there  being  not  so  much  as  one  en¬ 
tire  house  left;  its  present  inhabitants  only  a  few 
poor  wretches,  harbouring  themselves  in  the  vaults, 
and  subsisting  chiefly  on  fishing ,  who  seem  to  be 
preserved  in  this  place,  by  divine  Providence,  as  a 
visible  argument  how  God  has  fulfilled  his  word  con¬ 
cerning  Tyre,  that  it  should  be  ‘as  the  top  of  a  rock, 
a  place  for  fishers  to  dry  their  nets  on.?  ” 

And  even  Volney  seems  to  be  constrained  to  add 
his  testimony  to  confirm  the  fulfilment  of  the  divine 
prediction,  respecting  Tyre.  After  contrasting  its 
former  glory  with  its  present  desolation,  he  says, 
“  The  whole  village  of  Tyre  contains  only  fifty  or 
sixty  poor  families,  who  live  obscurely  on  the  pro¬ 
duce  of  their  little  ground  and  a  trifling  fishery” 
And  Bruce  describes  Tyre,  in  the  very  language  of 
the  prophet,  as  “a  rock  whereon  fishers  dry  their 
nets.”  Several  of  our  missionaries  have  visited  the 
site  of  this  once  populous,  refined,  and  wealthy  city, 
and  add  their  testimony  to  that  of  other  travellers, 
of  its  present  desolate  condition. 

Thus  we  see  how  remarkably  prophecies,  com¬ 
mitted  to  writing  above  two  thousand  years  ago,  are 
at  this  day  literally  fulfilled,  in  the  utter  desolation 
of  some  of  the  richest  and  strongest  cities  which  ever 
existed  in  the  world. 

The  prophecies  recorded  in  the  book  of  Daniel 
are  very  wonderful.  There  we  have  described  the 
rise  and  fall  of  four  successive  monarchies  or  em¬ 
pires,  and  a  prophecy  concerning  the  conquests  of 
Alexander  the  Great,  and  concerning  his  successors, 
embracing  so  many  particulars  that  it  assumes  the 

14 


158  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

appearance  of  a  history  of  the  events  which  it  pre¬ 
dicts.  Porphyry,  an  early  and  learned  opposer  of 
Christianity,  was  so  struck  with  the  coincidence  be¬ 
tween  the  predictions,  and  the  history  of  the  events 
by  which  they  are  fulfilled,  that  he  declared  that  the 
prophecy  must  have  been  written  after  the  events 
occurred.  The  infidel  can  make  no  complaint  of 
obscurity  here,  as  he  commonly  does  when  prophe¬ 
cies  are  adduced;  the  objection  now  is,  that  the  pre¬ 
diction  is  too  explicit  and  circumstantial.  This  ob¬ 
jection  of  Porphyry  induced  Jerome  to  use  the  fol¬ 
lowing  pertinent  language :  Cujus  impugned io  tes¬ 
timonium  veritatis  est.  Tanta  enim  dictorum 
Jides  fuit ,  ut  prophet  a  incredulis  hominibus  non 
videatur  futurci  dixisse ,  sed  narrasse  prxterita. 
The  meaning  of  which  is,  “  This  objection  is  a  testi¬ 
mony  of  the  truth ;  for  such  is  the  perspicuity  of  the 
language,  that  the  prophet  in  the  opinion  of  infidel 
men,  seems  rather  to  be  narrating  past  events,  than 
predicting  those  which  are  future,” 

It  will  be  sufficient  to  observe,  that  there  is  not  the 
least  foundation .  for  this  opinion  of  Porphyry,  that 
the  book  of  Daniel  was  written  after  the  time  of  An- 
tiochus  Epiphanes.  Josephus  relates  that  the  pro¬ 
phecies  of  Daniel  were  shown  to  Alexander  the 
Great,  when  he  visited  Jerusalem;  and  that  this  was 
the  reason  of  his  granting  so  many  privileges  to  the 
Jewish  people.  However  this  may  be,  Daniel  is 
spoken  of,  in  the  first  book  of  Maccabees;  and  Jose¬ 
phus  himself  reckons  him  among  the  greatest  of  pro¬ 
phets.  If  this  book  had  been  written  at  that  late 
period,  it  never  could  have  found  a  place  in  the  Jew¬ 
ish  canon,  as  the  prophecies  of  Daniel.  These  pro¬ 
phecies  are  also  recognized  and  quoted  by  Jesus 
Christ  as  the  productions  of  Daniel. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY, 


159 


CHAPTER  XL 


PROPHECIES  RESI ECTING  MESSIAH — PREDICTIONS  OF  CHRIST  RESPECTING 
THE  DESTRUCTION  OF  JERUSALEM. 

The  prophecies  which  relate  to  the  Messiah  are  so* 
numerous  and  interesting,  and  involve  so  much  criti¬ 
cal  discussion,  that  to  exhibit  them  in  their  proper 
light,  a  volume  would  scarcely  be  sufficient.  I  must, 
therefore,  be  contented  to  refer  to  the  most  remark¬ 
able  of  these  predictions,  in  a  very  brief  and  general 
way. 

1.  It  is  plain,  from  a  cursory  perusal  of  the  Old 
Testament,  that  frequent  intimations  are  given  of  the 
coming  of  a  remarkable  personage.  From  these,  the 
Jewish  nation  have  been  led,  in  all  ages,  to  entertain 
the  expectation  of  a  Messiah;  and  from  them,  the 
idea  of  a  distinguished  person  who  was  to  proceed 
from  Judea,  seems  to  have  pervaded  the  surrounding 
nations.  Some  of  the  passages  of  Scripture,  on  which 
this  opinion  was  founded,  were,  the  promise  of  “  the 
seed  of  the  woman;”  “the  seed  of  Abraham  in  whom 
all  nations  should  be  blessed;”  “  the  Shiloh  who  was 
to  come  out  of  Judah,  before  the  dominion  of  that 
tribe  should  depart;”  “the  prophet  like  unto  Moses, 
whom  the  Lord  would  raise  up ;”  “  the  king  whom 
the  Lord  would  set  upon  his  holy  hill;”  “the  priest 
after  the  order  of  Melchisedek;”  “the  anointed  one, 
or  Messiah;”  “the  righteous  branch;”  “the  corner 
stone;”  “the  desire  of  all  nations;”  “the  Shepherd 
of  Israel.” 

2.  The  time  of  the  arrival  of  the  Messiah  is  desig¬ 
nated  in  prophecy.  He  was  to  come  before  the  scep¬ 
tre  departed  from  Judah;  at  the  end  of  seventy  pro¬ 
phetic  weeks,  or  four  hundred  and  ninety  years,  from 
the  time  of  the  going  forth  of  the  command  to  restore 
and  build  Jerusalem ,  and  while  the  second  temple 
was  yet  standing. 


160 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


3.  The  place  of  his  birth,  and  the  family  from 
which  he  was  to  descend,  were  also  explicitly  men¬ 
tioned  in  prophecy.  From  the  evangelical  history, 
and  from  the  acknowledgment  of  the  Jews,  it  is 
evident,  that  they  well  know  that  the  Messiah  was 
to  be  born  at  Bethlehem,  and  to  be  of  the  family  of 
David. 

4.  Things  of  an  apparently  contradictory  nature 
are  predicted  concerning  the  Messiah.  At  one  time 
he  is  represented  as  a  king  and  conqueror,  whose 
dominion  would  be  co-extensive  with  the  earth,  and 
who  would  flourish  in  righteousness  and  peace  for 
ever;  at  another  he  is  exhibited  as  one  “despised 
and  rejected,  a  man  of  sorrow  and  grief,  as  wounded 
and  bruised,  as  cut  off  out  of  the  land  of  the  living, 
and  as  pouring  out  his  soul  unto  death.”  These 
apparently  irreconcilable  characters  led  the  Jews  at 
one  time  to  entertain  the  opinion  that  two  Messiahs 
were  predicted;  the  one  a  triumphant  conqueror,  the 
other  a  persecuted  and  patient  sufferer.  But,  how¬ 
ever  great  the  apparent  inconsistency,  there  is  an 
exact  accomplishment  of  both  characters  in  Jesus  of 
Nazareth.  And  certainly,  the  same  cannot  be  said 
of  any  other  person  who  ever  lived. 

5.  It  is  predicted  of  the  Messiah,  that  he  should  be 
A  light  to  the  gentiles;  and  that  under  his  ad¬ 
ministration,  the  face  of  the  world  should  be  changed, 
and  that  peace  and  righteousness  should  prevail. 
Although  this  prophecy  is  only  in  part  fulfilled,  yet 
so  much  has  been  accomplished  in  the  call  of  numer¬ 
ous  Gentile  nations  to  the  standard  of  the  Messiah, 
and  in  the  benign  and  salutary  influence  of  Chris¬ 
tianity,  that  we  must  conclude  that  it  was  uttered 
under  the  influence  of  inspiration. 

6.  It  was  not  only  predicted  that  Messiah  should 
be  cut  off,  but  it  is  expressly  stated  that  he  should 
die  as  a  vicarious  sacrifice,  an  expiatory  victim  for 
sin  and  transgression.  “  Thou  shalt  make  his  soul 
an  offering  for  sin.” 

For  the  fulfilling  of  these  predictions,  I  need  only 
refer  to  the  recorded  testimony  of  the  evangelists. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


161 


That  there  is  a  remarkable  coincidence  between  the 
language  of  the  prophets  and  the  history  of  the  evan¬ 
gelists,  cannot  be  denied,  however  it  may  be  account¬ 
ed  for.  The  fifty -third  chapter  of  Isaiah  has  a  counter¬ 
part  in  the  sufferings  and  death  of  Christ,  which  has 
forced  conviction  on  the  minds  of  many  unbelievers. 

But  there  are  also  many  particular  facts  and  cir¬ 
cumstances  foretold  respecting  the  Messiah,  which  it 
may  be'  proper  briefly  to  mention.  His  forerunner, 
John  the  Baptist,  is  predicted  by  Isaiah  and  Malachi. 
His  miracles,  his  uncomplaining  meekness  and  tran¬ 
quil  submission  under  cruel  sufferings,  by  Isaiah.  His 
riding  on  an  ass,  and  a  colt  the  foal  of  an  ass;  his 
being  pierced  where  the  wound  should  be  visible; 
his  being  sold  for  thirty  pieces  of  silver  which  should 
be  appropriated  to  buy  the  Potter’s  Field,  by  Zecha- 
riah.  It  is  predicted  in  the  Psalms,  that  they  would 
“  part  his  raiment  and  cast  lots  for  his  vesture  ;”  and 
that  vinegar  would  be  given  him  to  drink.  The  very 
words  too  which  he  uttered  on  the  cross,  when  for¬ 
saken  of  God,  are  set  down  in  the  twenty-second 
Psalm. 

It  was  also  predicted  in  the  Law  of  Moses,  by  an 
expressive  type,  “  that  not  a  bone  of  him  should  be 
broken;”  tire  fulfilment  of  which  was  wonderful, 
since  the  legs  of  both  those  crucified  with  him  were 
broken.  Isaiah  foretold  that  he  should  make  his 
“  grave  with  the  wicked,  and  with  the  rich  in  his 
death,”  which  was  literally  accomplished  when  Jesus 
Christ  was  suspended  on  the  cross  between  two 
thieves,  and  when  he  was  taken  down  from  the  cross 
by  a  rich  man  and  buried  by  him  in  his  own  new 
tomb. 

The  most  of  these  particulars  were  fulfilled  by  the 
free  actions  of  the  enemies  of  Jesus,  who  had  no  idea 
that  they  were  fulfilling  any  divine  prophecy.  It  is 
impossible,  that  so  many  circumstances,  literally  pre¬ 
dicted,  should  have  been  fulfilled  by  a  mere  fortui¬ 
tous  concurrence. 

The  whole  ritual  law  is  in  fact  a  prophecy  of 
Jesus.  To  him  the  Old  Testament  dispensation  had 

14* 


162  EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 

reference.  The  Law,  the  Psalms,  and  the  Prophets 
all  testify  of  him.  As  said  the  angel  to  St.  John, 
The  testimony  of  jesus  is  the  spirit  of  pro¬ 
phecy. 

Christ  himself  delivered,  while  upon  earth,  many 
clear  and  remarkable  prophecies.  Most  of  his  para¬ 
bles  have  a  prophetic  character  and  in  a  striking 
manner  represent  the  progress  of  the  gospel,  the 
rejection  of  the  Jews,  the  calling  of  the  Gentiles,  and 
the  future  condition  of  the  Church.  He  also  foretold, 
in  express  words,  the  treatment  which  his  followers 
should  receive  from  the  world,  the  treachery  of  Judas 
Iscariot,  the  conduct  of  Peter  in  denying  him  three 
times  in  one  night,  the  particular  circumstances  and 
exact  manner  of  his  own  death,  and  his  resurrection 
on  the  third  day.  But  I  must  pass  over  all  these  at 
present,  and  confine  my  attention  to  that  astonishing 
prophecy,  which  Jesus  delivered  to  his  disciples  on 
Mount  Olivet,  concerning  the  utter  destruction  of  the 
temple  of  Jerusalem,  and  of  the  whole  Jewish  na¬ 
tion.  This  prediction  was  uttered  about  forty  years 
before  the  events  occurred,  and  was  recorded  by  Mat¬ 
thew,  according  to  the  common  opinion  of  early 
writers,  thirty,  or  at  least  twenty  years  before  it  was 
fulfilled.  The  same  was  recorded  by  Mark  and 
Luke,  a  few  years  after  the  writing  of  Matthew’s 
gospel,  but  several  years  before  the  occurrence  of 
these  prodigious  things  which  are  foretold  in  it. 
The  testimony  of  antiquity  is,  that  both  these  evan¬ 
gelists  were  dead  before  the  invasion  of  Judea  by  the 
Romans.  John  was  the  only  one  of  the  evangelists, 
or  perhaps  of  the  apostles,  who  lived  to  witness  the 
fulfilling  of  the  Lord’s  prophecy;  and  it  is  remarka¬ 
ble,  that  in  his  gospel  this  subject  is  never  mentioned. 

Let  it  be  remembered,  that  when  this  prophecy 
was  delivered  by  our  Saviour,  there  was  not  the 
least  human  probability  of  such  an  event,  as  the  de¬ 
struction  of  Jerusalem.  The  Jews  were  in  a  state  of 
profound  peace,  and  the  power  of  the  Romans  was 
such  that  it  could  not  have  been  conjectured,  that  one 
small  nation  would  think  of  rebelling  against  them. 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 


165 


The  words  of  this  prophecy  may  be  read  in  the 
twenty-fourth  chapter  of  the  gospel  of  Matthew;  also 
in  the  thirteenth  chapter  of  the  gospel  of  Mark;  and 
in  the  seventeenth  and  twenty-first  chapters  of  the 
gospel  of  Luke. 

I  will  first  collect  into  one  view  all  the  most  re¬ 
markable  particulars  of  this  prophecy,  and  then  show 
how  they  were  fulfilled.  The  predictions  relate,  1. 
To  the  signs  and  precursors  of  the  desolation  of  the 
holy  city;  2.  To  the  circumstances  of  its  siege  and 
capture ;  3.  To  the  consequences  of  this  tremendous 
catastrophe. 

1 .  The  signs  and  precursors  of  this  event  were  to 
be  false  Christs;  seditions  and  wars;  famines,  pes¬ 
tilences,  earthquakes,  and  extraordinary  appearances 
in  the  heavens;  the  persecution  of  Christians;  the 
apostasy  of  professors,  and  the  great  want  of  charity, 
and  depravation  of  morals  among  the  people. 

2.  The  circumstances  of  this  tremendous  judgment 
of  Heaven,  are  such  as  these :  that  the  event  should 
occur  before  the  existing  generation  had  completely 
passed  away;  that  it  should  be  brought  on  by  a 
war  waged  against  the  Jews,  by  a  heathen  nation, 
bearing  idolatrous  ensigns ;  that  Jerusalem  should  be 
utterly  destroyed,  and  the  temple  so  completely  demol¬ 
ished,  that  one  stone  of  that  sacred  edifice  should  not 
be  left  on  another ;  that  multitudes  should  perish  by 
the  sword;  that  great  numbers  should  be  carried 
away  captives;  that  the  distress  should  exceed  any 
thing  which  had  ever  occurred  in  the  world;  and 
that  the  divine  wrath  should  be  manifest  in  all  these 
calamities,  as  it  is  called  the  day  of  vengeance,  and  it 
is  said  that  there  should  be  wrath  against  the  people. 

3.  The  consequences  of  the  destruction  of  the 
temple  of  Jerusalem,  as  predicted  by  Christ,  were  to 
be  the  dispersion  of  the  Jews  through  all  the  nations; 
the  total  overthrow  of  the  Jewish  commonwealth, 
which  is  expressed  by  the  prophetic  symbols  of 
“  the  sun  being  darkened,  the  moon  not  giving  her 
light,  and  the  stars  falling  from  heaven ;”  the  rejec¬ 
tion  of  the  Jews  and  the  calling  of  the  Gentiles;  the 


164  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

rising  of  false  prophets  and  false  Messiahs;  the  ex¬ 
tent  and  continuance  of  these  judgments  on  the  Jew¬ 
ish  nation ;  with  some  intimation  of  their  restoration. 
The  escape  of  the  Christians  from  these  calamities  is 
also  foretold,  and  directions  given  for  their  flight,; 
and  on  their  account  it  is  promised,  that  those  days 
should  be  shortened ;  and  finally,  it  is  predicted  that 
the  gospel  should  be  preached  among  all  nations. 

Let  us  now  proceed  to  inquire,  in  what  manner 
these  numerous  and  extraordinary  predictions  were 
accomplished;  and  we  cannot  but  remark,  that  it 
seems  to  have  been  ordered  specially  by  Providence, 
that  the  history  of  the  series  of  events  by  which  this 
prophecy  was  fulfilled,  should  be  written  by  a  man 
who  was  not  a  Christian;  and  who  was  an  eye-wit¬ 
ness  of  the  facts  which  he  records.  I  allude  to  the 
Jewish  historian,  Josephus,  who  is  an  author  of  high 
respectability,  and  whose  testimony  is  of  great  value 
in  the  cause  of  Christianity. 

1.  In  regard  to  false  Christs,  of  which  the  prophe¬ 
cy  speaks  so  emphatically,  we  learn  from  the  histo¬ 
rian  just  mentioned,  that  impostors  and  magicians 
drew  multitudes  after  them  into  the  wilderness,  prom¬ 
ising  to  show  them  signs  and  wonders,  some  of  whom 
became  insane,  and  others  were  punished  by  Felix, 
the  procurator.  One  of  these  impostors  was  that 
Egyptian  spoken  of  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  who 
drew  multitudes  of  people  after  him  to  Mount  Olivet, 
promising  that  he  would  cause  the  walls  of  Jerusa¬ 
lem  to  fall  down  at  his  word. 

Theudas  was  another  who  pretended  to  be  a  pro¬ 
phet,  and  gave  out  that  he  would  divide  the  waters 
of  Jordan;  but  he  was  quickly  routed  by  Cuspius 
Fadus,  and  all  his  followers  scattered.  The  impostor 
himself  was  taken  alive,  and  his  head  cut  off  and 
brought  to  Jerusalem.  In  the  reign  of  Nero,  and 
during  the  time  that  Felix  was  procurator  of  Judea, 
impostors  arose  in  such  numbers,  that  the  historian 
informs  us,  “many  of  them  were  apprehended  and 
killed  every  day.” 

There  were  also,  at  this  time,  great  commotions 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


165 


and  horrible  seditions  and  wars,  in  various  places; 
as  at  Cesarea,  Alexandria,  and  Babylon.  There 
were  great  contentions  between  the  Jews  and  Sama¬ 
ritans;  and  also  between  the  Jews  and  people  of 
other  nations  who  dwelt  in  the  same  cities  with 
them.  Both  Josephus  and  Philo  give  a  particular 
account  of  these  disturbances,  in  which  multitudes 
of  the  people  were  slain. 

Famines,  pestilences,  and  earthquakes,  are  men¬ 
tioned  by  Suetonius,  and  by  several  other  profane 
historians,  who  are  cited  by  Eusebius,  by  Josephus, 
by  Tacitus,  and  by  Seneca. 

That  prodigies  were  frequent,  is  expressly  asserted 
by  Josephus  and  Tacitus.  The  former  declares  that 
a  star  hung  over  the  city  like  a  sword,  for  a  whole 
year ;  that  at  the  ninth  hour  of  the  night,  a  bright 
light  shone  round  the  altar  and  the  temple,  so  that 
for  the  space  of  half  an  hour  it  appeared  to  be  bright 
day;  that  the  eastern  gate  of  the  temple,  which  it 
required  twenty  men  to  shut,  and  which  was  fasten¬ 
ed  by  strong  bars  and  bolts,  opened  of  its  own  ac¬ 
cord  ;  thaf  before  sunset,  there  was  seen  in  the 
clouds,  the  appearance  of  chariots  and  armies  fight¬ 
ing  ;  that  at  the  feast  of  Pentecost,  while  the  priests 
were  going  into  the  inner  temple,  a  voice  was  heard, 
as  of  a  multitude,  saying,  “  Let  us  depart  hence.” 
And  what  affected  the  people  more  than  any  thing 
else  was,  that  four  years  after  the  war  began,  a 
countryman  came  to  Jerusalem,  at  the  feast  of  Ta¬ 
bernacles,  and  ran  up  and  down  crying,  day  and 
night,  “A  voice  from  the  east,  and  a  voice  from  the 
west,  a  voice  from  the  four  winds,  a  voice  against 
Jerusalem  and  the  temple.  Wo  !  wo  to  Jerusalem!” 
It  was  in  vain  that  by  stripes  and  torture  the  ma¬ 
gistrates  attempted  to  restrain  him ;  he  continued 
crying,  especially  at  the  public  festivals,  for  seven 
years  and  five  months,  and  yet  never  grew  hoarse 
nor  appeared  to  be  weary,  until  during  the  siege, 
while  he  was  crying  on  the  wall,  a  stone  struck 
him  and  killed  him  instantly.  Tacitus,  the  Roman 
historian,  joins  his  testimony  to  that  of  Josephus. 


1G6 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


“ Armies/’  says  he,  “were  seen  engaged  in  the  hea¬ 
vens,  the  glittering  of  arms  was  observed;  and  sud¬ 
denly  the  fire  from  the  clouds  illuminated  the  tem¬ 
ple;  the  doors  of  the  inner  temple  were  suddenly 
thrown  open  and  a  voice  more  than  human  was 
heard  proclaiming,  ‘The  gods  are  departing;’  and  at 
the  same  time,  the  motion  of  their  departure  was 
perceived.”  Men  may  form  what  judgment  they 
please  of  these  narratives;  but  one  thing  is  certain, 
that  the  minds  of  men  were,  about  this  time,  much 
agitated  and  terrified  with  what  appeared  to  them 
to  be  prodigies.  There  were  “fearful  sights  and 
great  signs  from  heaven.” 

2.  The  circumstances  attending  the  siege  and  cap¬ 
ture  of  the  city,  were  as  exactly  foretold  as  the  pre¬ 
ceding  signs.  “  The  abomination  of  desolation,” 
spoken  of  by  Daniel  the  prophet,  was  nothing  else 
than  the  Roman  armies,  whose  ensign  was  an  eagle 
perched  upon  a  spear,  which  ensigns  were  worship¬ 
ped  as  divinities.  These  stood  where  they  ought 
not ,  when  they  were  planted  not  only  ip  the  holy 
land,  hut  on  the  consecrated  spot  where  the  temple 
had  stood.  But  the  Christians  had  been  warned,  at 
the  first  appearance  of  this  desolating  abomination, 
immediately  to  betake  themselves  to  flight,  which 
they  did,  and,  instead  of  going  into  the  city,  retired 
to  Pella  beyond  Jordan. 

The  distress  of  the  Jews  within  the  city,  during  the 
siege,  where  two  or  three  millions  of  people  were 
crowded  into  a  narrow  space,  almost  exceeds  belief. 
What  with  their  continual  battles  with  the  Romans ; 
what  with  intestine  feuds  and  tumults;  what  with 
famine  and  pestilence,  the  sufferings  which  they 
endured  cannot  now  be  conceived.  No  such  distress 
was  ever  experienced  by  any  people  before  or  since. 

Jerusalem  was  hemmed  in  on  all  sides  by  the  be¬ 
sieging  army,  and  notwithstanding  the  greaf  strength 
of  its  fortifications,  was  taken.  Although  Titus  had 
given  express  orders  that  the  temple  should  be  pre¬ 
served,  the  mouth  of  the  Lord  had  declared  that  it 
should  be  otherwise;  and  accordingly  it  was  burnt 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  167 

to  the  ground,  and  the  very  foundation  dug  up  by 
the  soldiers  with  the  hope  of  finding  hidden  treasures. 
After  the  city  had  been  destroyed,  Titus  ordered  the 
whole  space  to  be  levelled  like  a  field;  so  that  a  per¬ 
son  approaching  the  place  would  hardly  suspect  that 
it  had  ever  been  inhabited. 

The  number  slain  in  the  war  has  already  been 
mentioned,  to  which  we  may  now  add  that  the  cap¬ 
tives  amounted  to  ninety-seven  thousand.  Josephus, 
in  relating  these  events,  adopts  a  language  remark¬ 
ably  similar  to  that  used  by  Christ  in  the  prophecy. 
“  The  calamities  of  all  people,”  says  he,  “  from  the 
creation  of  the  world,  if  they  be  compared  with  those 
suffered  by  the  Jews,  will  be  found  to  be  far  sur¬ 
passed  by  them.”  The  words  of  Christ  are:  “ There 
shall  be  great  tribulation,  such  as  was  not  from  the 
beginning  of  the  world  to  this  time;  no,  nor  ever 
shall  be.” 

That  these  unparalleled  calamities  proceeded  from 
the  vengeance  of  heaven  against  a  people  whose 
iniquities  were  full,  was  not  only  acknowledged  by 
Josephus,  but  by  Titus.  After  taking  a  survey  of 
the  city,  the  height  of  its  towers  and  walls,  the  mag¬ 
nitude  of  the  stones,  and  the  strength  of  the  bands 
by  which  they  were  held  together,  he  broke  out  into 
the  following  exclamation :  “  By  the  help  of  God,  we 
have  brought  this  war  to  a  conclusion.  It  was  God 
who  drew  out  the  Jews  from  these  fortifications;  for 
what  could  the  hands  or  military  engines  of  men 
avail  against  such  towers  as  these  ?”  And  he  refused 
to  be  crowned  after  the  victory,  saying  that  he  was 
not  the  author  of  this  achievement,  but  the  anger 
of  God  against  the  Jews ,  was  what  put  the  victory 
into  his  hands. 

3.  Finally,  the  consequences  of  this  catastrophe 
were  as  distinctly  predicted,  and  as  accurately  ful¬ 
filled,  as  the  preceding  events.  The  Jews  who  sur¬ 
vived  were  dispersed  over  the  world,  in  which  con¬ 
dition  they  continue  till  this  day.  The  Christians, 
availing  themselves  of  the  warnings  of  their  Lord, 
escaped  all  the  calamities  of  the  siege.  Jerusalem 


168 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITV. 


was  trodden  down  of  the  Gentiles,  and  continues  to 
be  trodden  down  until  this  day. 

Jerusalem  was  rebuilt  by  Adrian,  but  not  precisely 
on  the  old  site,  and  was  called  iElia,  which  name  it 
bore  until  the  time  of  Constantine.  The  apostate 
Julian,  out  of  hatred  to  Christianity,  and  with  the 
view  of  defeating  the  prediction,  “  Jerusalem  shall  be 
trodden  down  of  the  Gentiles,”  determined  to  restore 
the  Jews,  and  rebuild  their  temple.  Immense  sums 
were  appropriated  for  the  work,  the  superintendence 
of  which  was  assigned  to  one  of  his  lieutenants;  and 
the  governor  of  the  province  to  which  Jerusalem 
belonged,  assisted  in  it.  But  horrible  balls  of  fire, 
bursting  forth  from  the  foundations,  rendered  the 
place  inaccessible  to  the  workmen,  who  were  often 
much  burnt,  so  that  the 'enterprise  was  laid  aside. 
The  account  now  given  is  attested  by  Julian  himself, 
and  his  favourite  heathen  historian  Ammianus.  The 
witnesses  are  indeed  numerous  and  unexceptionable : 
“Ammianus  Marcellinus,  a  heathen;  Zemach  David, 
a  Jew,  who  confesses  that  Julian  was  divinitus 
impeditus ,  providentially  hindered  in  his  attempt ; 
Nazianzen  and  Chrysostom  among  the  Greeks;.  Am¬ 
brose  and  Rufin  among  the  Latins;  all  of  whom 
flourished  at  the  very  time  when  this  wonderful 
event  occurred.  Theodoret,  Socrates,  Sozomen,  and 
Philostorgius,  respectable  historians,  recorded  it  with¬ 
in  fifty  years  after  the  event,  and  while  the  eye-wit¬ 
nesses  of  the  fact  were  still  surviving.”*  That  part 
of  the  prophecy  which  relates  to  the  restoration  of 
the  Jews,  remains  to  be  accomplished,  and  we  hope 
the  accomplishment  is  not  far  distant.  When  this 
event  shall  take  place,  the  evidence  from  this  pro¬ 
phecy  will  be  complete  and  almost  irresistible.  This 
shall  occur  when  “  the  times  of  the  Gentiles  shall  be 
fulfilled.”  The  circumstances  of  this  glorious  event 
are  more  particularly  described  by  Paul,  in  his  Epis¬ 
tle  to  the  Romans  (chap,  xi.)  “  If  the  fall  of  them 
be  the  riches  of  the  world,  and  the  diminishing  of 
them  the  riches  of  the  Gentiles,  how  much  more  their 
*  See  Whitby’s  General  Preface  to  the  New  Testament. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


169 


fulness?  For  I  would  not,  brethren,  that  ye  should 
be  ignorant  of  this  mystery,  that  blindness  in  part  is 
happened  to  Israel,  until  the  fulness  of  the  Gentiles 
be  come  in;  and  so  all  Israel  shall  be  saved.”  The 
preaching  of  the  gospel  to  all  nations  has  been  con¬ 
sidered  in  another  place. 

After  this  concise  review  of  some  remarkable  pro¬ 
phecies  contained  in  the  Bible,  is  there  any  one  who 
can  persuade  himself  that  all  these  coincidences  are 
accidental,  or  that  the  whole  is  a  cunningly  devised 
fable?  That  man  must  indeed  be  blind,  who  cannot 
see  this  “light  which  shineth  in  a  dark  place;  this 
surf  word  of  prophecy  which  holy  men  of  God 
spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost.” 


CHAPTER  XII. 

NO  OTHER  RELIGION  POSSESSES  THE  SAME  KIND  AND  DEGREE  OP  EVIDENCE 
AS  CHRISTIANITY  ;  AND  NO  OTHER  MIRACLES  ARE  AS  WELL  ATTESTED 
AS  THOSE  RECORDED  IN  THE  BIBLE. 

* 

Having  given  a  brief  view  of  the  external  evidences 
of  Christianity,  it  is  now  proper  to  inquire  whether 
any  system  of  religion,  ancient  or  modern,  is  as  well 
supported  by  evidence;  and  whether  other  miracles 
have  testimony  in  their  favour,  as  satisfactory  as  that 
by  which  the  miracles  of  the  gospel  are  accompanied. 

The  usual  declamation  of  infidel  writers  on  this 
subject  is  calculated  to  make  the  impression  on  unsus¬ 
picious  readers,  that  all  religions"  are  similar  in  their 
origin ;  that  they  all  lay  claim  to  miracles  and  divine 
communications;  and  that  all  stand  upon  an  equal 
footing.  But  when  we  descend  to  particulars,  and 
inquire  what  religions  that  now  exist,  or  ever  did 
exist,  profess  to  rest  their  claims  on  well  attested 
miracles  and  the  exact  accomplishment  of  prophecy, 
none  besides  the  Jewish  and  Christian  can  be  pro- 

15 


170  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

duced.  Among  the  multiform  systems  of  Paganism, 
there  is  not  one  which  was  founded  on  manifest 
miracles  or  prophecies.  They  had  indeed  their  pro¬ 
digies  and  their  oracles,  by  which  the  credulous  mul¬ 
titude  were  deceived;  and  their  founders  pretended 
to  have  received  revelations  or  to  have  held  commu¬ 
nion  with  the  gods.  But  what  well  attested  miracu¬ 
lous  fact  can  be  produced  from  all  the  religions  of  the 
heathen  world?  What  oracle  ever  gave  responses 
so  clear  and  free  from  ambiguity,  as  to  furnish  evi¬ 
dence  that  the  knowledge  of  futurity  was  possessed? 
It  is  easy  to  pretend  to  divine  revelation :  this  is  done 
by  every  fanatic. 

It  is  not  disputed  that  many  impostors  have  ap¬ 
peared  in  the  world,  as  well  as  many  deluded  fanatics. 
But  the  reason  why  all  their  claims  and  pretensions 
may  with  propriety  be  rejected,  is,  that  they  were  not 
able  to  exhibit  any  satisfactory  evidence  that  they 
were  commissioned  from  heaven  to  instruct  mankind 
in  religion. 

In  this  we  are  all  agreed.  Of  what  use  therefore 
can  it  be,  to  bring  up  these  impostures  and  delusions, 
when  the  evidences  of  the  Christian  religion  are  under 
consideration?  Can  it  be  a  reason  for  rejecting  a 
religion  which  comes  well  attested,  that  there  have 
been  innumerable  false  pretensions  to  divine  revela¬ 
tion?  Must  miracles  supported  by  abundant  testi¬ 
mony  be  discredited,  because  there  have  been  reports 
of  prodigies  and  miracles  which  have  no  evidence? 
And  because  heathen  oracles  have  given  answers  to 
inquiries  respecting  future  events,  dark,  indetermi¬ 
nate,  and  designedly  ambiguous;  shall  we  place  no 
confidence  in  numerous  authentic  prophecies,  long 
ago  committed  to  writing,  which  have  been  most 
exactly  and  wonderfully  accomplished? 

It  is  alleged,  that  the  early  history  of  all  ancient 
nations  is  fabulous,  and  abounds  in  stories  of  in¬ 
credible  prodigies;  and  hence  it  is  inferred,  that  the 
miracles  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament  should  be 
considered  in  the  same  light.  To  which  it  may  be 
replied,  that  this  general  consent  of  nations  that  mira- 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  171 

cles  have  existed,  is  favourable  to  the  opinion  that 
true  miracles  have  at  some  time  occurred.  It  may 
again  be  observed,  that  the  history  of  Moses,  which 
is  more  than  a  thousand  years  older  than  any  profane 
history,  has  every  evidence  of  being  a  true  relation 
of  facts;  and  moreover,  that  the  age  in  which  the 
miracles  of  the  New  Testament  were  performed,  so 
far  from  being  a  dark  and  fabulous  age,  was  the  most 
enlightened  period  of  the  heathen  world.  It  was  the 
age  of  the  most  celebrated  historians,  orators,  and 
poets.  There  never  was  a  time  when  it  would  have 
been  more  difficult  to  gain  a  general  belief  in  mira¬ 
cles  which  had  no  sufficient  testimony  than  in  the 
Augustan  and  succeeding  age.  Not  only  did  learn¬ 
ing  flourish;  but  there  was  at  that  period  a  general 
tendency  to  skepticism  and  atheism.  There  can 
evidently  therefore  be  no  inference  unfavourable  to 
Christianity,  derived  from  the  belief  of  unfounded 
stories  of  miraculous  events  in  the  dark  ages  of  anti¬ 
quity.  The  only  effect  of  the  prevalence  of  false 
accounts  of  miracles  should  be,  to  produce  caution 
and  careful  examination  into  the  evidence  of  every 
report  of  this  kind.  Reason  dictates  that  truth  and 
falsehood  should  never  be  confounded.  Let  every 
fact  be  subjected  to  the  test  of  a  rigid  scrutiny,  and 
let  it  stand  or  fall,  according  as  it  is  supported  or 
unsupported  by  testimony.  If  the  miracles  of  the 
Bible  have  no  better  evidence  than  the  prodigies  of 
the  heathen,  they  ought  to  receive  no  more  credit ; 
but  if  they  have  solid  evidence,  they  ought  not  to  be 
confounded  with  reports  which  carry  imposture  on 
their  very  face,  or  at  least  have  no  credible  testimony 
in  their  favour. 

There  is  no  other  way  of  deciding  on  facts  which 
occurred  long  since,  but  by  testimony.  And  the  truth 
of  Christianity  is  really  a  matter  of  fact.  In  support 
of  it,  we  have  adduced  testimony  which  cannot  be 
invalidated;  and  we  challenge  our  opponents  to  show 
that  any  other  religion  stands  on  the  same  firm  basis. 
Instead  of  this,  they  would  amuse  us  with  vague 
declamations  on  the  credulity  of  man,  and  the  many 


172  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

fabulous  stories  which  have  been  circulated  and  be¬ 
lieved.  But  what  has  this  to  do  with  the  question? 
We  admit  all  this,  and  maintain  that  it  does  not  fur¬ 
nish  the  semblance  of  an  argument  against  the  truth 
of  the  well-attested  facts  recorded  by  the  evangelists. 
Because  there  is  much  falsehood  in  the  world,  is  there 
no  such  thing  as  truth?  It  would  be  just  as  reason¬ 
able  to  conclude  that,  because  many  men  have  been 
convicted  of  falsehood,  there  are  no  persons  of  vera¬ 
city  in  the  world;  or  because  there  are  many  knaves, 
all  pretensions  to  honesty  are  unfounded. 

The  Mohammedan  religion  is  frequently  brought 
forward  by  the  enemies  of  revelation,  with  an  air  of 
confidence,  as  though  the  pretensions  and  success  of 
that  impostor  would  derogate  from  the  evidences  of 
Christianity.  It  is  expedient,  therefore,  to  bring  this 
subject  under  a  particular  examination.  And  here 
let  it  be  observed,  that  we  do  not  reject  any  thing, 
respecting  the  origin  and  progress  of  this  religion, 
which  has  been  transmitted  to  us  by  competent  and 
credible  witnesses.  We  admit  that  Mohammed  ex¬ 
isted  and  was  the  founder  of  a  new  sect,  and  that 
from  a  small  beginning  his  religion  spread  with 
astonishing  rapidity  over  the-*  fairest  portion  of  the 
globe.  We  admit  also,  that  he  was  the  author  of  the 
Koran,  which  he  composed  from  time  to  time,  pro¬ 
bably  with  the  aid  of  some  one  or  two  other  persons. 
It  is  also  admitted,  that  he  was  an  extraordinary 
man,  and  prosecuted  the  bold  scheme  which  he  had 
projected,  with  uncommon  perseverance  and  address. 
Neither  are  we  disposed  to  deny  that  the  Koran  con¬ 
tains  many  sublime  passages,  relative  to  God  and  his 
perfections,  and  many  sound  and  salutary  precepts 
of  morality.  That  the  language  is  elegant,  and  a 
standard  of  purity  in  the  Arabic  tongue,  has  been 
asserted  by  all  Mohammedan  writers,  and  conceded 
by  many  learned  Christians.  But  as  to  his  pretended 
revelations,  there  is  no  external  evidence  whatever 
that  they  were  real ;  and  there  is  an  overwhelming 
weight  of  internal  evidence  that  they  are  not  from 
God. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  173 

To  bring  this  subject  fairly  before  us,  let  the  fol¬ 
lowing  considerations  be  impartially  weighed: 

1.  The  pretensions  of  Mohammed  were  supported 
by  no  miracles  or  prophecies.  He  was  often  called 
upon  by  his  opposers  to  confirm  his  mission  by  this 
decisive  proof ;  but  he  always  declined  making  the 
attempt,  and  resorted  to  various  excuses  and  subter¬ 
fuges.  In  the  Koran,  God  is  introduced  as  saying, 
“  Nothing  hindered  us  from  sending  thee  with  mira¬ 
cles,  except  that  the  former  nations  have  charged 
them  with  imposture:  thou  art  a  preacher  only.” 
Again,  that  if  he  did  perform  miracles,  the  people 
would  not  believe,  as  they  had  before  rejected  Moses, 
Jesus,  and  the  prophets  who  performed  them. 

Dr.  Paley*  has  enumerated  thirteen  different  places 
in  the  Koran,  where  this  objection  is  considered,  in 
not  one  of  which  is  it  alleged  that  miracles  had  been 
performed  for  its  confirmation.  It  is  true,  that  this 
artful  man  told  of  things  sufficiently  miraculous;  but 
for  the  truth  of  these  assertions,  we  have  no  manner 
of  proof  except  his  own  word,  which,  in  this  case,  is 
worth  nothing. 

If  it  had  been  as  easy  a  thing  to  obtain  credit  to 
stories  of  miracles  publicly  performed,  as  some  sup¬ 
pose,  surely  Mohammed  would  have  had  recourse  to 
this  measure,  when  he  was  so  pressed  and  teased  by 
his  enemies  with  a  demand  for  this  very  evidence. 
But  he  had  too  much  cunning  to  venture  upon  an 
expedient  so  dangerous;  his  opposers  would  quickly 
have  detected  and  exposed  the  cheat.  At  length, 
however,  he  so  far  yielded  to  the  demand  of  his  ene¬ 
mies  as  to  publish  one  of  the  most  extravagant  sto¬ 
ries  which  ever  entered  into  the  imagination  of  man, 
and  solemnly  swore  that  every  word  of  it  was  true. 
I  refer  to  his  night  journey  to  Jerusalem,  and  thence 
to  heaven,  under  the  guidance  of  the  angel  Gabriel. 

This  marvellous  story,  however,  had  well  nigh 
ruined  his  cause.  His  enemies  treated  it  with  de¬ 
served  ridicule  and  scorn;  and  a  number  of  his  fol¬ 
lowers  forsook  him  from  that  time.  In  fact,  it  ren- 

*  Palcv’s  Evidences. 

15* 


174 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


dered  his  further  continuance  at  Mecca  entirely  inex¬ 
pedient  ;  and  having  before  despatched  some  of  his 
disciples  to  Medina,  he  betook  himself  with  his  fol¬ 
lowers  to  that  city,  where  he  met  with  a  more  cordial 
reception  than  in  his  native  place. 

The  followers  of  Mohammed,  hundreds  of  years 
after  his  death,  related  many  miracles,  which  they 
pretended  that  he  performed:  but  their  report  is  not 
only  unsupported  by  testimony,  but  is  in  direct  con¬ 
tradiction  to  the  Koran,  where  he  repeatedly  dis¬ 
claims  all  pretensions  to  miraculous  powers.  And 
the  miracles  which  they  ascribe  to  him,  while  they 
are  marvellous  enough,  are  of  that  trifling  and  ludi¬ 
crous  kind  commonly  to  be  met  with  in  all  forgeries 
in  which  miracles  are  represented  as  having  been 
performed;  such  as,  that  the  trees  walked  to  meet 
him;  that  the  stones  saluted  him;  that  a  beam  groaned 
to  him;  that  a  camel  made  complaint  to  him;  and  that 
a  shoulder  of  mutton  told  him  that  it  was  poisoned. 

It  appears  then  that  Mohammedanism  has  no  evi¬ 
dence  whatever  but  the  declaration  of  the  impostor. 
It  is  impossible  therefore  that  Christianity  should  be 
placed  in  a  more  favourable  point  of  light  than  in 
comparison  with  the  religion  of  Mohammed.  The 
one,  as  we  have  seen, rests  on  well  attested  miracles; 
the  other  does  not  exhibit  the  shadow  of  a  proof  that 
it  was  derived  from  heaven. 

2.  It  is  fair  to  compare  the  moral  characters  of  the 
respective  founders  of  these  two  religions.  And  here 
we  have  as  perfect  a  contrast  as  history  can  furnish. 
Jesus  Christ  was  “holy,  harmless,  undefiled,  and 
separate  from  -sinners.”  His  life  was  pure,  without 
a  stain.  Ilis  most  bitter  enemies  could  find  no  fault 
in  him.  He  exhibited,  through  life,  the  most  perfect 
example  of  disinterested  zeal,  pure  benevolence,  and 
unaffected  humility  which  the  world  ever  saw.  Mo¬ 
hammed  was  an  ambitious,  licentious,  cruel,  and  un¬ 
just  man.  His  life  was  stained  with  the  most  atro- 
cious  crimes.  Blasphemy,  perjury,  murder,  adul¬ 
tery,  and  robbery,  were  actions  of  daily  occurrence 
in  his  life.  And  to  shield  himself  from  censure,  and 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  175 

open  a  door  for  unbridled  indulgence,  he  pretended 
revelations  from  heaven  to  justify  all  his  vilest  prac¬ 
tices.  He  had  the  effrontery  to  pretend  that  God 
had  given  him  the  privilege  to  commit  at  pleasure 
the  most  abominable  crimes.  The  facts  which  could 
be  adduced  in  support  of  these  general  charges,  are 
so  numerous  and  so  shocking,  that  I  will  not  defile 
my  paper,  nor  wound  the  feelings  of  the  reader,  by 
a  recital  of  them. 

3.  The  Koran  itself  can  never  bear  a  comparison 
with  the  New  Testament,  in  the  view  of  any  impar¬ 
tial  person.  It  is  a  confused  and  incongruous  heap 
of  sublime  sentiments,  moral  pTecepts,  positive  insti¬ 
tutions,  extravagant  and  ridiculous  stories,  and  ma¬ 
nifest  lies  and  contradictions.  Mohammed  himself 
acknowledged  that  it  contained  many  contradictions; 
but  he  accounted  for  this  fact  by  alleging  that  what 
had  been  communicated  to  him  in  one  chapter  was 
repealed  in  a  subsequent  one :  and  so  he  charges  his 
inconsistency  on  his  Maker.  The  number  of  abro¬ 
gated  passages  is  so  great,  that  a  Mussulman  cannot 
be  easily  confuted  by  proving  the  falsehood  of  any 
declaration  in  the  Koran;  for  he  will  have  recourse 
to  this  doctrine  of  abrogation.  There  is  nothing  in 
this  book  which  cannot  easily  be  accounted  for;  no¬ 
thing  above  the  capacity  of  impostors  to  accomplish. 
It  is  artfully  accommodated  to  the  religions  of  Ara¬ 
bia,  prevalent  at  the  time.  It  gives  encouragement 
to  the  strongest  and  most  vicious  passions  of  human 
nature  ;  promotes  ambition,  despotism,  revenge,  and 
offensive  war;  opens  wide  the  door  of  licentiousness  ; 
and  holds  out  such  rewards  and  punishments  as  are 
adapted  to  make  an  impression  on  the  minds  of 
wicked  men.  It  discourages,  and  indeed  forbids  all 
free  inquiry,  and  all  discussion  of  the  doctrines  which 
it  contains.  Whatever  is  excellent  in  the  Koran,  is 
in  imitation  of  the  Bible;  but  wherever  the  author 
follows  his  own  judgment,  or  indulges  his  own  im¬ 
agination,  we  find  falsehood,  impiety,  or  ridiculous 
absurdity.* 

*  See  Ryan’s  History  of  the  effects  of  Religion  on  Mankind. 


176  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

4.  The  means by  which  the  religion  of  Moham¬ 
med  was  propagated  were  entirely  different  from 
those  employed  in  the  propagation  of  the  gospel.  If 
there  is  any  point  of  strong  resemblance  between  these 
two  systems,  it  consists  merely  in  the  circumstance 
of  their  rapid  and  extensive  progress  and  permanent 
continuance. 

But  when  we  come  to  consider  the  means  by 
which  this  end  was  attained  in  the  two  cases,  instead 
of  resemblance  we  find  a  perfect  contrast.  Moham¬ 
med  did  indeed  attempt  at  first  to  propagate  his  reli¬ 
gion  by  persuasion  and  artifice,  and  these  efforts  he 
continued  for  twelve  years,  but  with  very  small  suc¬ 
cess.  At  the  end  of  three  years,  he  had  gained  no 
more  than  fourteen  disciples ;  at  the  end  of  seven 
years,  his  followers  amounted  to  little  more  than 
eighty;  at  the  end  of  twelve  years  when  he  fled  from 
Mecca,  the  number  was  still  very  inconsiderable.  As 
far,  therefore,  as  there  can  be  a  fair  comparison  be¬ 
tween  the  progress  of  Christianity  and  Mohammed¬ 
anism — that  is,  during  the  time  that  Mohammed 
employed  argument  and  persuasion  alone — there  is 
no  resemblance.  The  progress  of  Christianity  was 
like  the  lightning  which  shineth  from  one  part  of 
heaven  to  the  other;  extending  in  a  few  years,  not 
only  without  aid  from  learning  and  power,  but  in 
direct  opposition  to  both,  throughout  the  whole  Ro¬ 
man  empire,  and  far  beyond  its  limits.  Mohammed¬ 
anism  for  twelve  years  made  scarcely  any  progress, 
though  it  commenced  among  an  ignorant  and  unciv¬ 
ilized  people.  During  this  period,  the  progress  was 
scarcely  equal  to  what  might  be  expected  from  any 
artful  impostor.  This  religion  never  spread  in  any 
other  way  than  by  the  sword.  As  soon  as  the  inhabi¬ 
tants  of  Medina  declared  in  favour  of  Mohammed, 
he  changed  his  whole  plan,  and  gave  out  that  he  was 
directed  to  propagate  his  religion  by  force.  From 
this  time  he  is  found  engaged  in  war.  He  began 
by  attacking  mercantile  caravans,  and  as  his  force 
increased  went  on  to  conquer  the  petty  kingdoms 
into  which  Arabia  was  then  divided.*  Sometimes. 

*  Sec  Prideaux’s  Life  of  Mohammed. } 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  177 

he  put  all  the  prisoners  to  death,  and  at  other  times, 
sold  them  into  slavery.  At  first,  the  order  was  to 
massacre  every  creature  that  refused  to  embrace  his 
religion;  but  he  became  more  lenient  afterwards, 
especially  to  Jews  and  Christians.  The  alternative 
was,  “  the  Koran,  death,  or  tribute.” 

But  it  is  a  great  mistake  to  suppose  that  the  con 
quests  of  Mohammed  himself  were  very  extensive 
He,  never,  during  his  life,  extended  his  dominion 
beyond  the  limits  of  Arabia,  except  that  he  overran 
one  or  two  inconsiderable  provinces  of  Syria.  It 
was  by  the  Caliphs,  his  successors,  that  so  great  a 
part  of  Asia  and  Egypt  were  brought  into  subjection. 
But  what  is  there  remarkable  in  these  successes  more 
than  those  of  other  conquerors?  Surely  the  propa¬ 
gation  of  Mohammedanism  by  the  sword,  however 
rapid  or  extensive,  can  never  bear  any  comparison 
with  that  of  Christianity,  by  the  mere  force  of  truth 
under  the  blessing  of  heaven. 

5.  The  tendency  and  effects  of  Mohammedanism, 
when  compared  with  the  tendency  and  effects  of 
Christianity,  serve  to  exhibit  the  latter  in  a  very 
favourable  light.  The  Christian  religion  has  been  a 
rich  blessing  •  to  every  country  which  has  embraced 
it ;  and  its  salutary  effects  have  borne  proportion  to 
the  care  which  has  been  taken  to  inculcate  its  genu¬ 
ine  principles,  and  the  cordiality  with  which  its  doc¬ 
trines  have  been  embraced.  What  nations  are  truly 
civilized?  Where  does  learning  flourish?  Where 
are  the  poor  and  afflicted  most  effectually  relieved? 
Where  do  men  enjoy  the  greatest  security  of  life, 
property,  and  liberty?  Where  is  the  female  sex 
treated  with  due  respect,  and  exalted  to  its  proper 
place  in  society?  Where  is  the  education  of  youth 
most  assiduously  pursued?  Where  are  the  brightest 
examples  of  benevolence;  and  where  do  men  enjoy 
most  rational  happiness?  If  we  were  called  upon  to 
designate  the  countries  in  which  these  advantages 
are  most  highly  enjoyed,  every  one  of  them  would 
be  found  in  Christendom;  and  the  superiority  enjoy¬ 
ed  by  some  over  the  others,  would  be  found  to  bear 


178 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


an  exact  proportion  to  the  practical  influence  of  pure 
Christianity. 

On  the  contrary,  if  we  take  a  survey  of  the  rich 
and  salubrious  regions  possessed  by  Mohammedans, 
we  behold  a  wide-spread  desolation.  The  fairest 
portion  of  the  globe,  where  arts,  literature,  and  re¬ 
finement  formerly  most  flourished,  are  now  blighted. 
Every  noble  institution  has  sunk  into  oblivion.  Des¬ 
potism  extends  its  iron  sceptre  over  these  ill-fated 
countries,  and  all  the  tranquillity  ever  enjoyed  is  the 
dead  calm  of  ignorance  and  slavery.  Useful  learn¬ 
ing  is  discouraged,  free  inquiry  proscribed,  and  ser¬ 
vile  submission  required  of  all.  Justice  is  pervert¬ 
ed  or  disregarded.  No  man  has  any  security  for 
life  or  property,  and  as  to  liberty,  it  is  utterly  lost 
wherever  the  Mohammedan  religion  prevails.  While 
the  fanatic  ardour  of  making  proselytes  continued, 
the  fury  of  the  propagators  of  this  faith  rendered 
them  irresistible.  Indeed,  their  whole  system  is 
adapted  to  a  state  of  war.  The  best  work  that 
can  be  performed,  according  to  the  Koran,  is  to 
fight  for  the  propagation  of  the  faith;  and  the  high¬ 
est  rewards  are  promised  to  those  who  die  in  battle. 
There  is  no  doubt  that  the  principles  of  the  Koran 
greatly  contributed  to  the  conquest  of  the  Saracens, 
by  divesting  them  of  all  fear  of  death,  and  inspiring 
them  with  an  assurance  of  being  admitted  into  a 
sensual  paradise,  if  it  should  be  their  fate  to  be  slain 
in  battle.  “  The  sword  is  the  key  of  heaven  and 
hell;  a  drop  of  blood  shed  in  the  cause  of  God,  a 
night  spent  under  arms,  is  of  more  avail  than  two 
months  of  fasting  and  prayer.  Whosoever  falls  in 
battle,  his  sins  are  forgiven.  At  the  day  of  judg¬ 
ment,  his  wounds  shall  be  resplendent  as  vermilion 
and  odoriferous  as  musk ;  and  the  loss  of  his  limbs 
shall  be  replaced  by  the  wings  of  angels  and  cheru- 
bims.”  But  when  they  had  finished  their  conquests, 
and  a  state  of  peace  succeeded  their  long  and  bloody 
wars,  they  sunk  into  torpid  indolence  and  stupidity. 
While  other  nations  have  been  making  rapid  im¬ 
provements  in  all  the  arts,  they  have  remained  sta- 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  179 

tionary,  or  rather  have  been  continually  going  back¬ 
wards.  They  have  derived  no  advantages  from  the 
revival  of  letters,  the  invention  of  printing,  or  other 
improvements  in  the  arts  and  sciences.  The  people 
who  have  been  subjected  to  their  despotism  without 
adopting  their  religion,  are  kept  in  the  most  degrad¬ 
ed  subjection. 

At  present,*  the  Greeks  are  making  noble  exer¬ 
tions  to  break  the  cruel  yoke  which  has  oppressed 
them,  and  though  unsupported  by  Christian  nations, 
have  succeeded  in  expelling  the  Turks  from  a  large 
portion  of  their  country.  God  grant  them  success, 
and  give  them  wisdom  to  make  a  good  use  of  their 
liberty  and  independence  when  acquired  and  estab¬ 
lished  !t  Mohammedanism  was  permitted  to  prevail, 
as  a  just  punishment  to  Christians  for  their  luxury 
and  dissensions.  It  is  to  he  hoped,  however,  that 
the  prescribed  time  of  these  “  locusts  of  the  abyss”  J 
is  nearly  come  to  an  end ;  and  that  a  just  God,  who 
has  so  long  used  them  as  a  scourge  to  Christians,  as 
he  formerly  did  the  Canaanites  to  be  thorns  in  the 
eyes  and  in  the  sides  of  the  Israelites,  will  soon  bring 
to  an  .end  this  horrible  despotism,  founded  on  a  vile 
imposture.  The  signs  of  the  times  give  strong  indi¬ 
cations  that  the  Mohammedan  power  will  shortly  be 
subverted.  But  it  is  not  for  us  to  “know  the  times 
and  the  seasons  which  the  Father  hath  put  in  his 
own  power.” 

The  only  thing  further  necessary  to  he  considered, 
in  this  chapter,  is,  the  miracles  which  have  been 
brought  forward  as  a  counterpoise  to  the  miracles 
of  Christ  and  his  apostles.  This  is  an  old  stratagem, 
at  least  as  old  as  the  second  century,  when  one  Phi- 
lostratus,  at  the  request  of  Julia  Augusta,  wife  of  the 
emperor  Severus,  wrote  a  history,  or  rather  romance, 
of  Apollonius  of  Tyana,  a  town  in  Cappadocia. 
This  Apollonius  was  nearly  contemporary  with  Je¬ 
sus  Christ ;  but  whether  he  was  a  philosopher  or  a 
conjurer  cannot  now  be  ascertained;  for  as  to  the 

*  A.D.  1825. 

t  The  Greeks  have  now  become  an  independent  nation,  1836. 

t  Rev.  ix.  3, 


ISO  EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 

story  of  Philostratus,  which  is  still  extant,  it  is  total¬ 
ly  unsupported  by  any  reference  to  eye-witnesses  of 
the  facts,  or  any  documents  of  credit,  and  has  through¬ 
out  as  much  the  air  of  extravagant  fiction  as  any 
thing  that  was  ever  published.  That  the  design  of 
the  writer  was  to  set  up  this  Apollonius  as  a  rival  to 
Jesus  Christ,  is  not  avowed,  but  is  sufficiently  evi¬ 
dent  from  the  similarity  of  many  of  his  miracles  to 
those  recorded  in  the  gospels,  borrowed  from  the 
evangelical  history.  He  is  made  to  raise  the  dead, 
to  cast  out  demons,  and  to  rise  from  the  dead  him¬ 
self.  In  one  instance,  the  very  words  of  the  demons 
expelled  by  Jesus  Christ,  as  recorded  by  St.  Luke, 
“Art  thou  come  to  torment  us  before  the  time?”  are 
put  into  the  mouth  of  a  demon,  said  to  be  cast  out 
by  Apollonius.  But  in  addition  to  these  miracles, 
his  biographer  pretends  that  he  saw  beasts  with  a 
human  head  and  a  lion’s  body,  women  half  white 
and  half  black,  together  with  phoenixes,  griffins,  dra¬ 
gons,  and  similar  fabulous  monsters. 

In  the  fourth  century,  Hierocles,  a  bitter  enemy 
of  Christianity,  instituted  a  comparison  between  Je¬ 
sus  and  Apollonius,  in  which,  after  considering  their 
miracles,  he  gives  the  preference  to  the  latter.  This 
book  was  answered  by  Eusebius,  from  whose  work 
only,  we  can  now  learn  how  Hierocles  treated  the 
subject,  as  the  book  of  the  latter  is  not  extant.  The 
only  conclusion  which  can  be  deduced  from  this  his¬ 
tory  of  Apollonius  is,  that  the  miracles  of  Christ  were 
so  firmly  believed  in  the  second  century,  and  were 
attended  by  such  testimony,  that  the  enemies  of 
Christianity  could  not  deny  the  facts,  and  therefore 
resorted  to  the  expedient  of  circulating  stories  of 
equal  miracles  performed  by  another. 

Modern  infidels  have  not  been  ashamed  to  resort 
to  the  same  stale  device.  Mr.  Hume  has  taken 
much  pains  to  bring  forward  a  great  array  of  evi¬ 
dence  in  favour  of  certain  miracles,  in  which  he  has 
no  faith,  with  the  view  of  discrediting  the  truth  of 
Christianity.  These  have  been  so  fully  and  satisfac¬ 
torily  considered  by  Dr.  Douglass,  Bishop  of  Salis- 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY.  181 

bury,  in  his  Criterion,  and  by  Dr.  Campbell,  in  his 
Essay  on  Miracles,  that  I  need  only  refer  to  these 
learned  authors  for  a  complete  confutation  of  Hume's 
arguments  from  this  source. 

For  the  sake,  however,  of  those  who  may  not  have 
access  to  these  works,  I  will  lay  down  a  few  general 
principles  by  which  we  may  distinguish  true  and 
false  miracles;  for  which  I  am  indebted  principally 
to  the  author  of  the  Criterion. 

1.  The  nature  of  the  facts  should  be  well  consider¬ 
ed,  whether  they  are  miraculous.  The  testimony 
which  supports  a  fact  may  be  sufficient,  and  yet  it 
may  have  been  brought  about  by  natural  causes. 

The  miracles  of  Jesus  Christ  were  such  that  there 
was  no  room  for  doubt  respecting  their  supernatural 
character:  but  a  great  part  of  those  performed  by 
others,  which  have  received  the  best  attestation,  were 
of  such  a  nature  that  they  may  readily  be  accounted 
for,  without  supposing  any  divine  interposition.  The 
case  of  the  man  diseased  in  his  eyes,  said  to  have 
been  cured  by  Vespasian’s  rubbing  his  hand  over 
them,  and  the  lame  man  cured  by  a  touch  of  the 
emperor’s  foot,  were  no  doubt  impositions  practised 
by  the  priests  of  the  temple  where  they  were  per¬ 
formed.  The  emperor  did  not  pretend  to  possess  any 
miraculous  power,  and  was  induced,  only  after  much 
persuasion,  to  make  the  experiment.  It  may  be 
admitted  that  the  facts  as  related  by  Tacitus,  though 
he  was  not  an  eye-witness,  are  true.  Such  persons 
were  probably  brought  forward  and  a  cure  pretended 
to  be  made,  but  there  is  no  evidence  that  there  was 
a  real  miracle.  There  was  no  one  present  who  felt 
interested  to  examine  into  the  truth  of  the  miracle. 
The  priests  who  proposed  the  thing  had  no  doubt 
prepared  their  subjects;  and  the  emperor  was  flatter¬ 
ed  by  the  honour  of  being  selected  by  their  god  to 
work  a  miracle.  Flow  often  do  beggars  in  the  street 
impose  upon  many,  by  pretending  to  be  blind  and 
lame !  The  high  encomiums  which  Mr.  Hume  be¬ 
stows  on  the  historian  Tacitus,  in  order  to  set  off  the 
testimony  to  the  best  advantage,  can  have  no  weight 

16 


182 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


here;  for  he  only  related  what  he  had  heard  from 
others,  and  showed  pretty  evidently  that  he  did  not 
credit  the  story  himself. 

The  same  may  be  said  respecting  the  man  at 
Saragossa,  spoken  of  by  Cardinal  de  Retz,  who  was 
represented  as  having  been  seen  without  a  leg,  but 
obtained  one  by  rubbing  the  stump  with  holy  oil. 
The  Cardinal  had  no  other  evidence  of  his  having 
ever  been  maimed,  than  the  suspicious  report  of  the 
canons  of  the  Church;  and  he  took  no  pains  to  ascer¬ 
tain  whether  the  leg  which  he  obtained  was  really 
flesh  and  blood,  or  an  artificial  limb. 

A  great  part  of  the  cures  said  to  have  been  per¬ 
formed  at  the  tomb  of  the  Abbe  Paris,  were  proved 
upon  examination  to  be  mere  pretences;  and  those 
which  were  real  may  easily  be  accounted  for,  from 
the  influence  of  a  heated  imagination  and  enthusias¬ 
tic  feelings;  especially,  since  we  have  seen  the  won¬ 
derful  effects  of  animal  magnetism  and  metallic  trac¬ 
tors. 

The  Abbe  Paris  was  the  oldest  son  of  a  counsellor 
of  Paris,  but  being  much  inclined  to  a  life  of  devo¬ 
tion  he  relinquished  his  patrimony  to  his  younger 
brother,  and  retired  to  an  obscure  part  of  Paris, 
where  he  spent  his  life  in  severe  penance,  and  in 
charitable  exertions  for  the  relief  of  the  distressed 
poor.  He  was  buried  in  the  ground  of  the  church 
of  St.  Medard,  near  the  wall,  where  his  brother 
erected  a  tombstone  over  the  grave.  To  this  spot 
many  poor  people  who  knew  his  manner  of  life, 
came  to  perform  their  devotions,  as  much,  probably, 
out  of  feelings  of  gratitude  as  any  thing  else.  Some, 
among  the  devotees  who  attended  at  this  place,  pro¬ 
fessed  that  they  experienced  a  salutary  change  in 
their  ailments.  This  being  noised  abroad,  as  the 
Abbe  had  been  a  zealous  Jansenist  all  who  were  of 
his  party  encouraged  the  idea  of  miracles  having 
been  performed;  and  multitudes  who  were  indis¬ 
posed,  were  induced  to  go  to  the  tomb  of  the  saint ; 
and  some,  as  they  confessed  before  a  competent  tri¬ 
bunal,  were  persuaded  to  feign  diseases  which  they 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


183 


never  had.  It  is  a  fact,  however,  that  the  greater 
part  received  no  benefit,  and  that  more  diseases  were 
produced  than  were  cured:  for,  soon,  many  of  the 
worshippers  were  seized  with  convulsions, from  which 
proceeded  the  sect  of  Convulsionists,  which  attract¬ 
ed  attention  for  many  years. 

It  was  soon  found  expedient  to  close  up  the  tomb; 
but  cures  were  still  said  to  be  performed  by  the  saint 
on  persons  in  distant  places.  The  Jesuits  exerted 
themselves  to  discredit  the  whole  business,  and  the 
Archbishop  of  Paris  had  a  judicial  investigation  made 
of  a  number  of  the  most  remarkable  cases,  the  results 
of  which  were  various,  and  often  ludicrous.  A  young 
woman  said  to  have  been  cured  at  the  tomb  of  blind¬ 
ness  and  lameness,  was  proved  to  have  been  neither 
blind  nor  lame.  A  man  with  diseased  eyes  was 
relieved,  but  it  appeared  that  he  was  then  using 
powerful  medicine,  and  that,  after  all,  his  eyes  were 
not  entirely  healed.  A  certain  Abbe  who  had  the 
misfortune  to  have  one  of  his  legs  shorter  than  the 
other,  was  persuaded  that  he  experienced  a  sensible 
elongation  of  the  defective  limb,  but  on  measurement 
no  increase  could  be  discovered.  A  woman  in  the 
same  situation  danced  on  the  tomb  daily  to  obtain  an 
elongation  of  a  defective  limb,  and  was  persuaded 
that  she  received  benefit ;  but  it  was  ascertained,  that 
she  would  have  to  dance  there  fifty-four  years,  before 
the  cure  would  be  effected,  at  the  rate  at  which  it 
was  proceeding;  but  as  for  the  unfortunate  Abbe, 
seventy-two  years  would  have  been  requisite.  In 
short,  the  whole  number  of  cures,  after  examination, 
was  reduced  to  eight  or  nine,  all  of  which  can  be 
easily  accounted  for  on  natural  principles ;  and  in 
several  of  these  instances,  the  cures  were  not  perfect. 

2.  A  second  consideration  of  great  weight  is,  that 
in  true  miracles  we  can  trace  the  testimony  to  the 
very  time  when  the  facts  are  said  to  have  occurred, 
but  in  false  miracles  the  report  of  the  facts  originates 
a  long  time  afterwards,  as  in  the  case  of  Apollonius, 
the  miracles  ascribed  to  Mohammed  by  Abulfeda, 
and  Al-Janabbi,  and  the  miracles  ascribed  by  the 


1S4 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


Jesuits  to  Ignatius  Loyola  their  founder;  which  were 
never  heard  of  until  long  after  his  death. 

3.  Another  criterion  of  importance  is,  that  the  re¬ 
port  of  miracles  should  originate  and  first  obtain  credit 
in  the  place  and  among  the  people,  where  they  are 
said  to  have  been  performed.  This  is  too  remarkably 
the  fact,  in  regard  to  the  miracles  of  the  Bible,  to 
require  any  proof.  But  many  stories  of  miracles  are 
rendered  suspicious  by  the  circumstance  that  they 
were  first  reported  and  believed  in  some  place  far 
from  that  in  which  they  were  alleged  to  have  been 
wrought.  The  miracles  ascribed  by  the  Romanists 
to  Francis  Xavier,  are  condemned  by  both  the  rules 
last  mentioned.  In  all  his  letters  while  a  missionary 
in  the  east,  he  never  hints  that  miracles  had  been 
wrought ;  and  a  reputable  writer  who  gave  some 
account  of  his  labours  nearly  forty  years  after  his 
death,  not  only  is  silent  about  Xavier’s  miracles,  but 
confesses  that  no  miracles  had  been  performed  among 
the  Indians.  These  miracles  were  said  to  be  per¬ 
formed  in  the  remote  parts  of  India  and  Japan,  but 
the  report  of  them  was  published  first  in  Europe. 
Almost  all  the  miracles  ascribed  by  the  Romish  Church 
to  her  saints,  fall  into  the  same  predicament.  The 
history  of  them  is  written  long  after  they  are  said  to 
have  been  performed,  and  often  in  countries  remote 
from  the  place  where  it  is  pretended  they  occurred; 
or  they  are  manifestly  the  effect  of  cunning  contriv¬ 
ance  and  imposture. 

4.  Another  necessary  question  in  judging  of  the 
genuineness  of  miracles,  is,  whether  the  facts  were 
scrutinized  at  the  time,  or  were  suffered  to  pass  with¬ 
out  examination.  When  the  miracles  reported  coin¬ 
cide  with  the  passions  and  prejudices  of  those  before 
whom  they  are  performed ;  when  they  are  exhibited 
by  persons  in  power,  who  can  prevent  all  examina¬ 
tion  and  put  what  face  they  please  on  facts,  they 
may  well  be  reckoned  suspicious.  The  cures  at  the 
tomb  of  the  Abbe  Paris  were  not  performed  in  these 
circumstances.  The  Jansenists  were  not  in  power, 
and  their  enemies  not  only  had  the  opportunity  to 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


185 


examine  into  the  facts,  but  actually  did  so  with  the 
utmost  diligence.  We  have  reason  to  believe,  there¬ 
fore,  that  we  have  now  a  true  report  of  those  occur¬ 
rences.  The  defect  of  these  miracles  is  in  their  na¬ 
ture,  not  in  their  evidence. 

But,  in  most  cases,  the  miracles  which  have  been 
reported,  took  place  when  there  was  no  opportunity 
of  examining  into  the  facts;  when  the  people  were 
pleased  to  be  confirmed  in  their  favourite  opinions; 
or  when  the  ruling  powers  had  some  peculiar  end  to 
answer.* 

But  supposing  these  miracles  to  be  ever  so  well 
attested,  I  do  not  perceive  how  the  evidence  of  divine 
revelation  can  be  affected  by  them;  for  if  it  could  be 
made  to  appear  that  these  were  supported  by  testi¬ 
mony  as  strong  as  that  which  can  be  adduced  in 
favour  of  the  miracles  of  the  New  Testament,  the 
only  fair  conclusion  is,  that  they  Who  believe  in 
Christianity  should  admit  them  to  be  true — but  what 
then?  Would  it  follow,  because  miracles  had  been 
wrought  on  some  rare  occasions,  different  from  those 
recorded  in  the  Bible,  that  therefore,  these  were  of 
no  validity  as  evidence  of  divine  revelation?  Would 
not  the  fact  that  other  miracles  had  been  wrought, 
rather  confirm  our  belief  in  those  which  were  per¬ 
formed  with  so  important  a  design?  Mr.  Hume  does, 
indeed,  artfully  insinuate  that  the  various  accounts 
of  miracles  which  exist  cannot  be  true,  because  the 
religions  which  they  were  wrought  to  confirm,  are 
opposite;  yet  not  one  of  those  which  he  brings  for¬ 
ward  as  being  best  attested,  was  performed  in  confir¬ 
mation  of  any  new  religion,  or  to  prove  any  particu¬ 
lar  doctrine,  therefore  they  are  not  opposed  to  Chris¬ 
tianity.  If  they  had  actually  occurred,  it  would  not 
in  the  lea^t  disparage  the  evidence  for  the  facts  re¬ 
corded  in  the  New  Testament.  And  especially,  it  is 
a  strange  conceit,  that  miracles  performed  within  the 
bosom  of.  the  Christian  Church  should  furnish  any 
proof  against  Christianity. 

It  is,  however,  no  part  of  the  object  of  those  who 

*  On  this  whole  subject,  sec  Douglass’s  Criterion. 

16* 


186 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


bring  forward  such  an  array  of  testimony  in  support 
of  certain  miracles,  to  prove  that  such  facts  ever 
occurred.  This  is  diametrically  opposite  to  their 
purpose.  Their  design  is  to  discredit  all  testimony 
in  favour  of  miracles,  by  showing,  that  facts  acknow¬ 
ledged  to  be  false  have  evidence  as  strong  as  those 
on  which  revealed  religion  rests.  But  they  have 
utterly  failed  in  the  attempt,  as  we  have  shown:  and 
if  they  had  succeeded  in  adducing  as  strong  testimo¬ 
ny  for  other  miracles,  we  would  readily  admit  their 
truth,  and  that  in  perfect  consistency  with  our  belief 
in  Christianity. 

The  Romish  Church  and  some  other  fanatical  sects, 
do  still  profess  to  Avork  miracles;  but  these  pretences 
are  never  submitted  to  the  test  of  an  impartial  exam¬ 
ination  by  opposers.  Or  if  they  are  ever  publicly 
exhibited,  as  in  the  case  of  the  liquefaction  of  the 
blood  of  St.  Januarius,  it  only  serves  to  convince  all 
reasonable  men  that  it  is  a  gross  imposture. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 


THE  BIBLE  COxNTAINS  INTERNAL  EVIDENCE  THAT  ITS  ORIGIN  IS  DIVINE. 

As  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  are  intimately  con¬ 
nected,  and  form  parts  of  the  same  system,  it  is  un¬ 
necessary  to  make  any  distinction  between  them,  in 
considering  this  branch  of  the  evidence  of  divine  re¬ 
velation. 

A  late  writer,*  of  great  eminence  and  popularity, 
has  represented  this  species  of  evidence  as  unsatis¬ 
factory;  as  not  capable  of  being  so  treated  as  to  pro¬ 
duce  conviction  in  the  minds  of  philosophical  infidels ; 
and  as  opening  a  door  to  their  most  specious  objec¬ 
tions  to  Christianity.  But  certainly  this  is  not  the  most 
effectual  method  of  supporting  the  credit  of  the  Scrip- 


*  Dr.  Chalmers. 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 


187 


tures.  Another  popular  writer/*  has  gone  to  the  other 
extreme,  and  seems  to  set  little  value  on  the  exter¬ 
nal  evidences  of  Christianity,  while  he  exhibits  the 
internal  in  a  light  so  strong  that  his  argument  assumes 
the  appearance  of  demonstration.! 

But  these  two  species  of  evidence,  though  distinct, 
are  harmonious,  and  strengthen  each  other.  There 
is,  therefore,  no  propriety  in  disparaging  the  one  for 
the  purpose  of  enhancing  the  value  of  the  other.  I 
believe,  however,  that  more  instances  have  occurred 
of  skeptical  men  being  convinced  of  the  truth  of 
Christianity  by  the  internal  than  by  the  external 
evidences.  It  is  the  misfortune  of  most  infidels,  that 
they  have  no  intimate  acquaintance  with  the  Bible  ; 
and  even  many  of  those  who  have  undertaken  to 
write  against  it,  appear  never  to  have  read  it  with 
any  other  view  than  to  find  some  ground  of  objec¬ 
tion. 

No  doubt  it  is  necessary  to  come  to  the  examina¬ 
tion  of  this  species  of  evidence,  with  a  candid  and 
docile  disposition.  If  reason  be  permitted  proudly 
to  assume  the  seat  of  judgment,  and  to  decide  what 
a  revelation  ought  to  contain  in  particular;  in  what 
manner,  and  with  what  degree  of  light  it  should  be 
communicated ;  whether  it  should  be  made  perfectly 
at  once,  or  gradually  unfolded;  and  whether,  from 
the  beginning,  it  should  be  universal ;  no  doubt,  the 
result  of  an  examination  of  the  contents  of  the  Bible, 
conducted  on  such  principles,  will  prove  unsatisfac¬ 
tory,  and  insuperable  objections  will  occur  at  every 
^tep  in  the  progress.  It  was  wise  in  Dr.  Chalmers  to 
endeavour  to  discourage  such  a  mode  of  investiga¬ 
tion,  as  being  most  unreasonable ;  for  how  is  it  pos¬ 
sible  that  such  a  creature  as  man  should  be  able  to 
know  what  is  proper  for  the  infinite  God  to  do,  or  in 
what  way  he  should  deal  with  his  creatures  upon 
earth?  To  borrow  the  language  of  this  powerful 

*  Soame  J-enyns. 

f  The  author  has  the  pleasure  of  knowing  that  in  his  more  recent 
publications,  Dr.  Chalmers  recognizes  the  validity  and  importance 
of  the  internal  evidence  of  Christianity,  and  has  treated  the  subject 
lri  his  usual  forcible  and  convincing  manner. 


188 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


writer,*  “We  have  experience  of  man,  but  we  have 
no  experience  of  God.  We  can  reason  upon  the 
procedure  of  man  in  given  circumstances,  because 
this  is  an  accessible  subject,  and  comes  under  the 
cognizance  of  observation;  but  we  cannot  reason 
upon  the  procedure  of  the  Almighty  in  given  circum¬ 
stances/7  But  when  he  speaks  “of  disclaiming  ail 
support  from  what  is  commonly  understood  by  the 
internal  evidence,77  and  “  saving  a  vast  deal  of  con¬ 
troversy,  by  proving  that  all  this  is  superfluous  and 
uncalled  for,77  I  am  constrained  to  think  that,  instead 
of  aiding  the  cause  of  Christianity,  the  excellent 
author  has  attempted  to  take  away  one  of  its  firmest 
props.  The  internal  evidence  of  revelation  is  analo¬ 
gous  to  the  evidence  of  the  being  and  perfections  of 
God  from  the  works  of  creation :  and  the  same  mode 
of  reasoning  which  the  deist  adopts  relative  to  the 
doctrines  and  institutions  of  the  Bible,  the  atheist 
may  adopt,  with  equal  force,  against  the  existence 
of  a  God.  If  men  will  be  so  presumptuous  as  to 
determine,  that  if  God  makes  a  world  he  will  form  it 
according  to  their  idea  of  fitness,  and  that  the  ap¬ 
parent  imperfections  and  incomprehensibilities  in  the 
material  universe  could  never  have  proceeded  from 
a  being  of  infinite  perfection,  atheism  must  follow 
of  course.  But  if,  notwithstanding  all  these  ap¬ 
parent  evils  and  obscurities,  there  is  in  the  struc¬ 
ture  of  the  world  the  most  convincing  evidence  of 
the  existence  of  an  all-wise  and  all-powerful  being, 
why  may  we  not  expect  to  find  the  same  kind  of 
evidence  impressed  on  a  revelation  from  God?  Upon 
Dr.  Chalmers7  principles  we  ought  to  depend  simply 
on  historical  testimony,  for  the  fact,  that  God  cre¬ 
ated  this  world;  and  “disclaim  all  support77  from 
what  may,  without  impropriety,  be  termed  the  in¬ 
ternal  evidence  of  the  existence  of  God,  derived  from 
the  contemplation  of  the  work  itself.  The  truth 
however,  is,  that  every  thing  which  proceeds  from 
God,  whatever  difficulties  or  obscurities  accompany 
it,  will  contain  and  exhibit  the  impress  of  his  charac- 

*  Chalmers’  Evidences. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


189 


ter.  As  this  is  resplendently  visible  in  the  heavens 
and  in  the  earth,  it  is  reasonable  to  think  that  it  will 
not  be  less  manifest  in  his  word.  If  the  truths  con¬ 
tained  in  a  revelation  be  worthy  of  God,  they  will 
be  stamped  with  his  image ;  and  if  'this  can  be  in 
any  measure  discovered,  it  undoubtedly  furnishes  the 
most  direct  and  convincing  evidence  of  their  divine 
origin.  This  is,  without  being  reduced  to  the  form 
of  a  regular  argument,  precisely  the  evidence  on 
which  the  faith  of  the  great  body  of  Christians  has 
always  rested.  They  are  incapable  of  appreciating 
the  force  of  the  external  evidence.  It  requires  an 
extent  of  learning  which  plain  Christians  cannot  be 
supposed  commonly  to  possess.  But  the  internal 
evidence  is  within  their  reach ;  it  acts  directly  upon 
their  minds  whenever  they  read  or  hear  a  portion  of 
the  word  of  God.  The  belief  of  common,  unlearned 
Christians,  is  not  necessarily  founded  on  the  mere 
prejudice  of  education ;  it  rests  on  the  best  possible 
evidence.  And  as  there  is  a  faith  which  is  saving 
and  to  which  a  purifying  efficacy  is  ascribed ;  if  we 
inquire  on  what  species  of  evidence  this  depends,  it 
must  be  answered,  on  internal  evidence,  not  indeed 
as  perceived  by  the  unaided  intellect  of  man,  but  as 
it  is  exhibited  to  the  mind  by  the  illumination  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  We  cannot  consent,  therefore,  to  give 
up  this  species  of  evidence,  as  “  superfluous  and  un¬ 
called  for;”  but  must  consider  it,  if  not  the  most 
effectual  to  silence  gainsayers,  yet  certainly  the  most 
useful  to  the  real  Christian-;  and  if  unbelievers  could 
be  induced  to  attend  to  it  with  docility  and  impar¬ 
tiality,  there  is  reason  to  think  that  they  would  ex¬ 
perience  its  efficacy,  in  the  gradual  production  of 
a  firm  conviction  of  the  truth  of  Christianity.  The 
internal  evidence  of  the  truth  of  the  Scriptures  can¬ 
not  be  fully  brought  into  view,  in  any  other  way 
than  by  a  careful  study  of  the  Bible.  It  cannot 
easily  be  put  into  the  form  of  logical  argument,  for  it 
consists  in  moral  fitness  and  beauty;  in  the  adapta¬ 
tion  of  truth  to  the  human  mind ;  in  its  astonishing 
power  of  penetrating  and  searching  the  heart  and 


190  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

affecting  the  conscience.  There  is  a  sublime  sancti¬ 
ty  in  the  doctrines  and  precepts  of  the  gospel;  a  de¬ 
votional  and.  heavenly  spirit  pervading  the  Scriptures; 
a  purity  and  holy  tendency  which  cannot  but  be  felt 
by  the  serious  reader  of  the  word  of  God ;  and  a 
power  to  sooth  and  comfort  the  sorrowful  mind ;  all 
which  qualities  may  be  perceived,  and  will  have 
their  effect,  but  cannot  be  embodied  and  presented, 
with  their  full  force,  in  the  form  of  argument.  But 
although  this  evidence,  from  the  nature  of  the  case, 
cannot  be  exhibited  in  its  entire  body,  to  any  but 
those  who  study  the  Scriptures  and  meditate  on  their 
truths  day  and  night,  it  is  possible  to  select  some 
prominent  points  and  present  them  to  the  reader  in 
such  a  light  as  to  produce  a  salutary  impression. 
This  is  what  will  be  briefly  attempted  in  the  follow¬ 
ing  remarks,  which  might  without  difficulty  be  great¬ 
ly  enlarged. 

1.  The  Scriptures  speak  of  God  and  his  attributes 
in  a  way  which  accords  with  what  right  reason 
would  lead  us  to  expect  in  a  divine  revelation.  He 
is  uniformly  represented  in  the  Bible  as  one,  and  as 
a  being  of  infinite  perfection;  as  eternal,  omnipotent, 
omniscient,  omnipresent,  and  immutable.  And  it  is 
truly  remarkable,  that  these  correct  and  sublime 
views  of  theology  were  entertained  by  those  who 
possessed  the  Scriptures,  when  all  other  nations  had 
fallen  into  the  grossest  polytheism  and  most  degrad¬ 
ing  idolatry.  Other  nations  were  more  powerful, 
and  greatly  excelled  the  Israelites  in  human  learn¬ 
ing;  but  in  the  knowledge  of  God  all  were  in  thick 
darkness,  whilst  this  people  enjoyed  the  light  of  truth. 
Learned  men  and  philosophers  arose  in  different 
countries,  and  obtained  celebrity  on  account  of  their 
theories,  but  they  effected  no  change  in  the  popular 
opinions;  indeed,  they  could  not  enlighten  others, 
when  they  were  destitute  of  the  light  of  truth  them¬ 
selves.  However  deists  may  deride  and  scoff  at  the 
Bible,  it  is  a  fact  capable  of  the  clearest  proof,  that 
had  it  not  been  for  the  Scriptures,  there  would  not 
at  this  time  be  such  a  thing  as  pure  theism  upon 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  191 

earth.  There  is  not  now  in  the  world  an  individual 
who  believes  in  one  infinitely  perfect  God,  whose 
knowledge  of  this  truth  may  not  be  traced  directly  or 
indirectly  to  the  Bible. 

How  can  it  be  accounted  for  that  the  true  theology 
should  be  found  accompanying  the  Scriptures  in  all 
ages,  while  it  was  lost  every  where  else,  unless  we 
admit  that  they  are  a  revelation  from  God  ?  If  the 
knowledge  of  the  true  God,  as  received  by  the  Jews, 
was  the  discovery  of  reason,  why  was  it  that  other 
nations  advanced  far  beyond  them  in  learning  and 
mental  culture,  never  arrived  at  the  knowledge  of 
this  important  truth  ? 

It  is  true,  indeed,  that  the  Scriptures  sometimes 
represent  God  as  having  bodily  parts  and  human 
passions;  but  a  little  consideration  will  show  the 
attentive  reader,  that  all  these  expressions  are  used 
in  accommodation  to  the  manner  of  speaking  among 
men.  Human  language  is  inadequate  to  express  the 
attributes  and  operations  of  the  Supreme  Being.  He 
is  infinitely  above  our  conceptions,  both  in  his  essence 
and  his  mode  of  existence  and  acting.  We  can  do 
no  more  than  approximate  towards  just  ideas  on  this 
subject.  When  we  speak  of  him  we  are  under  the 
necessity  of  conceiving  of  his  perfections  with  some 
relation  to  the  operations  of  the  human  mind,  and 
to  employ  language  expressive  of  human  acts  and 
feelings;  for  all  other  language  would  be  unintelligi¬ 
ble.  The  necessity  of  this  accommodation  extends 
much  further  than  many  seem  to  suppose.  It  exists 
not  only  in  relation  to  words  which,  taken  literally, 
convey  the  idea  of  bodily  members  and  human  pas¬ 
sions,  but  also  in  regard  to  those  which  express  the 
operations  of  will  and  intellect.  This  mode  of  speak¬ 
ing  therefore,  instead  of  being  an  objection  against 
the  Bible,  is  an  argument  of  the  wisdom  of  its  Author, 
who  has  spoken  to  man  in  the  only  way  in  which  he 
could  be  understood. 

Again,  it  is  seen  by  the  most  cursory  reader  that 
truth  is  not  taught  in  the  Bible  in  a  scientific  or  sys¬ 
tematic  order.  We  have  no  profound  metaphysical 


192 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 


disquisitions  of  philosophical  principles;  no  array  of 
artifical  dialectics;  no  systematic  arrangement  of  the 
subjects  treated.  In  all  this  there  may  be  great 
wisdom,  and  whether  we  can  see  the  reason  or  not, 
the  objection  to  revelation  on  this  ground  is  not 
greater  than  the  one  which  may  be  made  to  the 
natural  world,  because  the  materials  for  building 
which  it  contains,  are  not  found  erected  into  houses; 
and  because  all  its  fields  and  forests  are  not  placed 
in  the  order  of  an  artificial  garden  or  regular  orchard. 

The  method  of  speaking  of  God,  in  the-  sacred 
Scriptures,  is  at  once  most  simple  and  sublime.  Few 
words  are  employed,  but  these  are  most  significant. 
When  Moses  wished  to  receive  an  appropriate  name 
which  he  might  mention  to  Pharaoh,  he  was  directed 
to  say,  I  am  that  I  am,  hath  sent  me.  And  when  on 
another  occasion,  the  name  of  the  Most  High  was 
declared  to  Moses,  it  was  in  the  following  remarkable 
words:  The  Lord,  the  Lord  God,  merciful  and 

GRACIOUS,  LONG-SUFFERING  AND  ABUNDANT  IN  GOOD¬ 
NESS  AND  truth;  keeping  mercy  for  thousands; 

FORGIVING  INIQUITY,  AND  TRANSGRESSION,  AND  SIN; 
AND  THAT  WILL  BY  NO  MEANS  CLEAR  THE  GUILTY. 

If  the  most  perfect  simplicity,  united  with  the  highest 
sublimity,  would  be  received  as  a  proof  that  the 
writers  of  these  books  were  inspired,  we  could  adduce 
hundreds  of  passages  of  this  description;  but  we 
mean  not  to  lay  any  undue  stress  on  the  argument 
derived  from  this  source. 

The  glory  of  the  Scriptures  is  the  revelation  which 
they  contain  of  the  moral  attributes  of  God.  These 
are  manifested  with  but  a  feeble  light  in  the  works 
of  creation;  but  in  the  Bible  they  shine  with  trans¬ 
cendent  lustre.  It  would  by  no  means  comport  with 
the  intended  brevity  of  this  work,  to  enter  much  into 
detail  on  this  subject,  but  I  must  beg  the  indulgence 
of  the  reader  while  I  endeavour  to  bring  distinctly 
into  view  the  account  which  the  Scriptures  give  us 
of  the  holiness  and  the  goodness  of  God. 

These  two  attributes  are  stamped  on  the  pages 
of  the  Bible,  and  form  its  grand  characteristic.  It  is 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  193 

of  no  importance  whether  we  consider  these  as  dis 
tinct  or  as  expressive  of  two  aspects  in  which  the 
same  infinite  excellence  is  exhibited.  Who  can  open 
this  sacred  book  without  perceiving  that  the  God  of 
the  Bible  is  holy  ?  All  -his  laws,  institutions,  and 
dispensations  are  holy:  even  those  laws  which  are 
ceremonial  have  this  characteristic.  Every  person, 
edifice,  and  utensil  employed  in  his  worship,  must  be 
solemnly  consecrated;  and  all  must  approach  God 
with  caution  and  reverence,  because  he  is  holy.  The 
very  ground  where  he  occasionally  makes  himself 
known  is  rendered  holy.  Every  external  sign  and 
emblem  of  profound  reverence,  is  required  in  them 
who  worship  him;  and  when  he  manifests  himself 
with  more  than  usual  clearn$s&,  the  holiest  men  are 
overwhelmed  and  become  as  dead  men  under  a 
sense  of  their  own  vileness.  And  not  only  so,  but 
even  the  heavenly  hosts  who  are  free  from  every 
stain  of  sin,  seem  to  be  overwhelmed  with  the  view 
of  the  holiness  of  God.  They  not  only  cry  to  one 
another,  as  they  worship  around  his  august  throne, 
holy,  holy,  holy,  but  they  are  represented,  as  falling 
prostrate  at  his  feet,  and  veiling  their  faces  in  token 
of  profound  veneration.  All  those  passages  of  Scrip¬ 
ture  which  speak  of  the  wjiath,  the  indignation, 
the  fury,  the  jealousy,  or  the  anger  of  the 
Almighty,  are  no  more  than  strong  expressions  of 
his  infinite  holiness.  All  his  severe  judgments  and 
threatenings;  all  the  misery  which  he  ever  inflicts  on 
his  creatures  in  this  world  or  the  next;  and  above  all, 
the  intense  and  ineffable  sufferings  of  Christ,  are  ex¬ 
hibitions  of  the  holiness  of  God. 

Now  if  there  be  a  God,  he  must  be  holy;  and  if 
he  make  a  revelation  of  himself,  it  will  be  marked 
with  this  impress  of  his  character.  Wicked  men 
would  never  have  made  this  attribute  so  prominent ; 
they  would  have  been  disposed  rather  to  keep  it 
entirely  out  of  view.  There  is  no  truth  more  evident 
to  the  attentive  observer  of  human  nature  than  that 
men  do  not  naturally  love  holiness,  although  they  are 
obliged  to  acknowledge  its  worth.  This,  I  believe,  is 

17 


194 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


the  true  reason  wiry  the  Scriptures,  although  they 
contain  the  highest  excellence  in  composition,  both 
m  prose  and  poetry,  of  which  a  good  taste  cannot  be 
insensible,  are  neglected  by  literary  men,  or  rather 
studiously  avoided.  A  mere  fragment  of  any  other 
book,  if  it  could  claim  an  equal  antiquity  with  the 
Bible,  and  especially  if  it  possessed  any  thing  like  its 
excellence  of  composition,  would  be  sought  after  with 
avidity  by  all  men  of  taste;  but  the  Bible  remains 
almost  as  much  unstudied  by  men  of  this  description 
as  the  Koran.  This  has  often  appeared  to  me  para¬ 
doxical;  but  I  am  now  persuaded  that  the  true  rea¬ 
son  is  the  awful  holiness  of  God,  as  exhibited  in  this 
book  and  impressed  on  almost  every  page.  This 
glares  upon  the  conscience  of  an  unholy  man,  as  the 
meridian  sun  on  diseased  eyes.  God  is  a  consuming 
fire.  This  common  dislike  of  the  Bible,  even  in 
men  of  refined  taste  and  decent  lives,  furnishes  a 
strong  argument  for  its  divine  origin.  The  question 
before  us,  is,  who  composed  this  book,  inspired  men 
or  wicked  impostors?  The  characteristic  which  we 
have  been  considering,  will  accord  perfectly  with  the 
former  supposition;  it  never  can  be  reconciled  with 
the  latter.  There  is  a  moral  certainty  that  base  im¬ 
postors  never  would  have  written  a  book,  the  most 
remarkable  trait  of  which  is  holiness. 

The  goodness  of  god,  or  that  benevolence  which 
he  exercises  towards  his  creatures,  as  it  appears  in 
the  providence  which  sustains  and  feeds  so  great  a 
multitude  of  sentient  beings,  and  which  is  conspic¬ 
uously  manifested  to  the  human  family,  is  often  cele¬ 
brated  in  the  Scriptures.  Some  of  the  most  beautiful 
and  sublime  poems  which  were  ever  written,  are 
employed  in  celebrating  the  praise  of  God  for  his 
marvellous  goodness.  The  reader  is  requested  to 
turn  to  the  34th,  103d,  104th,  145th,  147th,  and  14Sth 
Psalms,  as  an  exemplification  of  this  remark. 

There  is  another  and  a  peculiar  view  of  the  divine 
goodness  given  in  the  Scriptures.  It  is  that  form  of 
goodness  called  mercy.  It  is  the  love  of  creatures 
who  had  forfeited  all  claim  to  any  kindness.  It  is 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


195 


the  bestowing  of  pardon  and  salvation  on  those  who 
are  condemned  to  death  by  the  righteous  laws  of 
God;  and  this  without  showing  himself  less  displeased 
with  their  sins  than  if  he  had  punished  them  for  ever. 
This  is  the  view  of  divine  goodness  which  is  peculiar 
to  the  Bible.  Reason  could  not  have  formed  a  con¬ 
jecture  concerning  it.  It  is  the  development  of  a 
trait  in  the  divine  character  before  unknown.  To 
reveal  the  mercy  of  God,  may  with  truth  be  said  to 
be  the  principal  object  of  the  Bible.  But  our  idea 
of  this  divine  goodness  is  very  imperfect  until  we 
learn  in  what  way  it  was  manifested.  No  words 
can  express  this  so  well  as  those  of  Christ  himself: 
“  God  so  loved  the  world,  that  he  gave  his  only  be¬ 
gotten  Son,  that  whosoever  believeth  on  him  should 
not  perish,  but  have  everlasting  life.” 

To  many,  perhaps,  it  will  appear  that  this  love 
is  so  extraordinary,  that  it  rather  forms  an  objection 
against  the  Bible  than  an  argument  in  its  favour.  If 
the  wonderful  and  unparalleled  nature  of  any  thing 
were  an  objection  to  it,  then  I  acknowledge  that  there 
would  be  some  ground  for  this  opinion.  But  what 
is  there  which  is  not  full  of  wonders,  when  we  come 
to  contemplate  it  attentively?  It  is  wonderful  that 
there  should  exist  such  a  creature  as  man,  or  such  a 
body  of  light  as  the  sun;  but  shall  we  therefore  refuse 
to  believe  in  their  existence?  To  come  nearer  to  the 
subject,  what  is  there  in  the  character  of  God  or  his 
works,  which  is  not  calculated  to  fill  the  mind  with 
surpassing  wonder?  His  eternity,  his  omniscience, 
his  omnipresence,  his  creating  power,  his  universal 
providence  are  so  wonderful,  that  we  are  at  a  loss  to 
say  which  is  most  wonderful;  or  whether  any  thing 
else  can  be  more  wonderful.  But  is  this  any  argu¬ 
ment  against  their  reality?  And  if  God  is  so  won¬ 
derful  in  his  other  attributes,  shall  we  expect  to  find 
nothing  of  this  kind  in  his  love,  which  is  his  highest 
glory?  There  is,  indeed,  no  goodness  of  this  sort 
among  men;  but  shall  we  make  our  faint  and  limited 
shadow  of  perfection  the  measure  by  which  to  judge 
of  the  character  of  the  infinite  God?  How  unreason 


196 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


able  such  a  procedure !  The  objection  derived  from 
the  insignificance  of  man,  the  object  of  this  wonderful 
love,  is  delusive;  for  the  same  objection  would  lie,  if 
his  powers  were  increased  ever  so  much.  In  com¬ 
parison  with  God,  all  creatures  may  be  considered  as 
on  a  level ;  in  this  view  all  distinctions  among  them 
are,  as  it  were,  annihilated.  On  the  same  principles, 
how  easy  would  it  be  to  construct  an  argument 
against  the  providence  of  God!  There  are  innumer¬ 
able  myriads  of  animalcules,  invisible  to  man,  all  of 
which  have  a  perfect  organization,  and  no  more  than 
an  ephemeral  existence.  It  might  be  said  these 
minute  creatures  are  too  diminutive  to  occupy  the 
attention  of  an  infinite  being.  It  might  be  said  that 
the  display  of  so  much  skill  in  the  organization  of 
creatures  of  a  day,  was  unsuitable  to  the  wisdom  of 
God.  But  however  plausible  such  objections  may 
be  made  to  appear,  they  are  all  founded  in  a  pre¬ 
sumptuous  intrusion  into  what  does  not  appertain  to 
us,  and  concerning  which  we  have  no  ability  to  form 
any  correct,  judgment.  Man  has  an  infinitude  below 
him  as  well  as  above  him,  in  the  gradation  of  being. 
I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  creation  is  absolutely  infi¬ 
nite,  but  that  we  can  fix  no  bounds  to  the  possibility 
of  a  continual  existence  of  creatures  in  the  scale  of 
perpetual  diminution,  any  more  than  we  can  to  the 
possibility  of  creatures  still  increasing  in  magnitude 
above  us.  In  this  respect,  as  in  others,  we  stand 
between  two  infinitudes,  the  great  and  the  small.  A 
single  drop  of  liquid  contains  myriads  of  perfectly 
organized  creatures;  and  who  knows  but  every  par¬ 
ticle  of  the  blood  of  these  invisible  animalcules  may 
contain  other  worlds  of  beings  still  more  minute, 
without  its  being  possible  for  us  to  fix  any  limit  to 
the  diminution  in  the  size  of  creatures? 

But  to  return;  unless  it  can  be  shown,  that  such 
love  as  that  exhibited  in  the  gospel  is  impossible, 
which  will  not  be  pretended,  or  that  it  is  repugnant 
to  the  moral  attributes  of  God,  its  wonderful  nature 
can  never  be  used  as  an  argument  against  its  exist¬ 
ence.  It  should  be  rather  argued,  the  more  wonder- 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  197 

ful,  the  more  like  God;  the  more  wonderful,  if  no 
appearance  of  human  weakness  accompany  it,  the 
more  unlikely  to  be  the  invention  of  man. 

And  here  I  would  suggest  an  idea,  which,  if  cor¬ 
rect,  would  shed  light  on  the  subject ;  namely,  that 
wonder  is  congenial  to  the  constitution  of  our  minds. 
The  soul  of  man  never  enjoys  more  elevated  emo¬ 
tions  and  more  exalted  pleasure,  than  in  the  contem¬ 
plation  of  objects  so  great  and  vast  as  to  be  perfectly 
incomprehensible.  This  is  the  foundation  of  that 
perpetual  adoration  which  occupies  the  inhabitants 
of  heaven.  An  incomprehensible  God  is  the  object 
of  contemplation  and  wonder  to  every  creature. 

2.  The  account  which  the  Bible  gives  of  the  origin 
and  character  of  man  accords,  very  exactly,  with  rea¬ 
son  and  experience.  Indeed,  this  is  the  only  source 
of  our  knowledge  respecting  the  circumstances  in 
which  man  was  placed  when  he  came  from  the  hand 
of  his  Creator.  Here  we  learn  the  origin  of  many 
things  which  we  observe,  but  the  reason  of  which 
we  never  could  have  discovered.  The  Bible  teaches 
us  that  the  wickedness  which  has  existed  in  all  ages 
and  among  all  people,  originated  in  the  apostasy  of 
the  first  man.  It  tells  us  the  reason  of  covering  the 
body  with  clothing,  which  is  the  custom  of  all  nations, 
even  where  clothing  is  unnecessary  to  preserve  the 
body  from  the  effects  of  cold.  Here  we  learn  the 
cause  of  the  earth’s  producing  briers  and  thorns 
spontaneously,  while  useful  grain  and  fruits  must  be 
cultivated.  Here  we  learn  the  origin  of  marriage, 
and  of  the  curse  which  has  followed  the  female  sex 
through  all  ages.  Moses  has  also  given  us  the  ori¬ 
gin  of  that  species  of  religious  worship  which  was 
anciently  practised  among  all  people,  but  of  which 
reason  can  teach  us  nothing.  I  mean  the  sacrifice 
of  animals  on  an  altar,  and  the  offerings  of  grain, 
of  incense,  &c.  He  has  also  related  the  fact  of  a 
universal  deluge,  of  which  we  have  so  many  ocular 
proofs  in  every  country  and  on  every  mountain,  as 
well  as  so  many  ancient  traditions. 

The  dispersion  of  the  human  family  over  the  face 

17* 


198 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


of  the  earth,  and  the  origin  of  the  several  nations  of 
antiquity,  are  recorded  in  the  Bible;  and  although 
this  record  is  contained  in  a  single  short  chapter,  and 
has  to  us  much  obscurity,  yet  Bishop  Watson  de¬ 
clared,  that  if  we  had  no  other  evidence  of  the 
authenticity  of  the  Pentateuch  besides  the  tenth  chap¬ 
ter  of  Genesis,  he  would  deem  that  alone  satisfac¬ 
tory.* 

The  origin  of  the  diversity  of  language  is  also 
found  in  the  Bible,  and  not  learned  from  any  other 
source.  Indeed,  the  origin  of  language  itself,  concern¬ 
ing  which  philosophers  have  disputed  so  much,  is 
very  evident  from  the  history  of  Moses.  Many 
learned  men  have  thought  that  alphabetical  writing 
took  its  rise  from  the  writing  of  the  decalogue  by  the 
finger  of  God  upon  the  tables  of  stone;  and  I  believe 
it  would  be  found  very  difficult  to  prove  by  any 
authentic  documents,  that  this  art  existed  before.  Be 
this  as  it  may,  it  must  be  admitted  that  the  earliest 
specimen  of  alphabetical  writing  now  extant  is  con¬ 
tained  in  the  Bible. 

To  these  particulars  it  may  be  added  that  we  have 
an  account  in  the  Bible  of  those  nations  and  people, 
concerning  whom  the  earliest  profane  historians  treat, 
long  before  their  histories  commence ;  and’  when  his¬ 
tory  comes  down  to  that  period  when  the  affairs  of 
nations  are  described  by  others,  it  receives  ample 
corroboration  from  their  narratives,  as  well  as  gives 
great  light  to  enable  us  to  understand  many  things 
which  they  have  imperfectly  recorded. 

But  the  account  which  the  Bible  gives  of  the  moral 
condition  of  man  is  that  which  is  now  most  to  our 
purpose.  In  all  ages  and  circumstances  the  human 
race  are  represented  as  exceedingly  depraved  and 
wicked.  Every  man  is  declared  to  be  a  transgressor, 
and  the  root  of  this  depravity  is  placed  in  the  heart. 
Many  of  the  gross  crimes  to  which  we  all  are  in¬ 
clined,  and  into  the  practice  of  which  many  fall,  are 
enumerated ;  and  where  these  are  avoided  and  con¬ 
cealed,  the  heart  is  described  as  deceitful  and  despe- 
*  See  Watson’s  Address  to  Scoffers. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


199 


rately  wicked;  and  that  pride  and  hypocrisy,  which 
spread  a  false  covering  over  the  true  character  of 
man,  are  denounced  as  among  the  things  most  hateful 
to  God.  Now,  if  this  picture  is  not  taken  from  the 
life;  if  the  character  of  man  is  entirely  different  from 
that  delineated  in  the  Scriptures,  or  if  the  vices  of  our 
nature  are  exaggerated;  however  difficult  it  may  be 
to  account  for  such  misrepresentation,  still  it  would 
furnish  a  strong  argument  against  the  inspiration  of 
the  writers  of  the  several  books  of  which  the  Bible 
consists.  But  on  the  other  hand,  if  the  character  of 
man,  as  given  in  the  Scriptures,  is  found  exactly  to 
correspond  with  universal  experience  and  observa¬ 
tion,  it  will  be  found  an  incontestable  proof  that  the 
writers  were  guided  by  a  strict  regard  to  truth.  To 
enter  into  a  particular  consideration  of  this  subject, 
does  not  comport  with  the  plan  of  this  work;  but  for 
the  truth  of  the  representations  of  Scripture,  I  would 
appeal  to  all  authentic  history,  and  to  every  man’s 
own  observation  and  experience.  The  description 
which  the  apostle  Paul  gives  of  the  vices  of  the  hea¬ 
then  world  in  his  time,  is  corroborated  by  all  the 
historians  and  satirists  who  lived  near  that  period. 
And  who  needs  a  laboured  proof  to  show  that  men 
have  generally  a  tendency  to  be  wicked?  Every 
civil  institution,  and  all  the  most  expensive  provisions 
of  civil  government,  are  intended  to  set  up  barriers 
against  the  violence,  injustice  and  licentiousness  of 
man.  Indeed  civil  government  itself  originated  in 
nothing  else  than  the  necessity  of  protection  against 
the  wickedness  of  men.  This,  however,  is  a  painful 
and  mortifying  conclusion,  and  it  is  not  wonderful 
that  pride  and  self-flattery  should  render  us  reluctant 
to  admit  it ;  nevertheless,  every  impartial  man  must 
acknowledge  that  the  human  character  is  correctly 
drawn  in  the  Bible. 

There  is  something  wonderful  in  the  power  which 
the  word  of  God  possesses  over  the  consciences  of 
men.  To  those  who  never  read  or  hear  it,  this  fact 
must  be  unknown ;  but  it  is  manifest  to  those  who 
are  conversant  with  the  sacred  volume,  or  who  are 


i 


200 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


in  the  habit  of  hearing  it  expounded.  Why  should 
this  book,  above  all  others,  have  the  power  of  pene¬ 
trating  and  searching  the  inmost  recesses  of  the  soul, 
and  showing  to  a  man  the  multitude  and  enormity 
of  the  evils  of  his  heart  and  life  ?  This  may  by  some 
be  attributed  to  early  education,  but  I  believe,  if  the 
experiment  could  be  fairly  tried,  it  would  be  found, 
that  men  who  had  never  been  brought  up  with  any 
sentiment  of  reverence  for  the  Bible,  would  experi¬ 
ence  its  power  over  the  conscience.  The  very  best 
cure  therefore  for  infidelity,  would  be  the  serious 
perusal  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  “  The  entrance  of 
thy  word  giveth  light. 99  “  The  law  of  the  Lord  is 

perfect,  converting  the  soul.” 

3.  It  deserves  our  special  attention,  in  considering 
the  internal  evidences  of  Christianity,  that  the  Scrip¬ 
tures  contain  explicit  information  on  those  points  on 
which  man  stands  most  in  need  of  instruction.  These 
may  be  reduced  to  three:  first,  the  doctrine  of  a  fu¬ 
ture  state  of  retribution;  secondly,  the  assurance  that 
sin  may  be  pardoned,  and  the  method  by  which  this 
can  consistently  be  done ;  thirdly,  the  means  for  re¬ 
storing  the  depraved  nature  of  man  to  a  state  of  rec¬ 
titude.  We  are  not  capable  of  determining  in  parti¬ 
cular,  as  we  have,  before  shown,  what  a  revelation 
should  contain,  but  it  is  reasonable  to  think  that  if 
God  gives  a  revelation,  it  will  contain  some  instruc¬ 
tion  on  these  important  points.  And  when  we  Ex¬ 
amine  what  the  Scriptures  teach  on  these  subjects, 
it  is  found  that  the  doctrine  is  worthy  of  God,  and 
so  adapted  to  the  necessities  of  man,  that  it  affords  a 
strong  argument  in  favour  of  their  inspiration. 

The  certainty  of  a  future  existence  to  man,  is  a 
prominent  feature. in  the  New  Testament.  The  con¬ 
nexion  between  our  present  conduct  and  future  con¬ 
dition  is  clearly  and  expressly  inculcated.  Many 
interesting  and  momentous  truths  connected  with  the 
world  to  come,  are  presented  in  a  light  the  best  cal¬ 
culated  to  make  a  deep  and  salutary  impression  on 
the  mind.  It  is  revealed,  that  there  will  be  a  general 
judgment  of  all  men,  and  that  God  hath  appointed  a 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


201 


day  when  this  event  shall  take  place.  It  is  moreover 
taught  in  the  New  Testament,  that  not  only  will 
every  man  be  judged,  but  every  action  of  every  in¬ 
dividual,  whether  it  be  good  or  bad,  will  be  brought 
under  review;  and  the  eternal  destiny  of  all  men  wdll 
be  fixed,  agreeably  to  the  judicial  decision  of  this  im¬ 
partial  trial.  Some  will  be  admitted  to  everlasting 
life,  in  the  world  above,  while  others  shall  go  away 
into  everlasting  misery,  into  that  place  66  prepared  for 
the  devil  and  his  angels.” 

Another  interesting  fact  revealed  in  the  New  Tes¬ 
tament  is,  that  there  will  be  a  general  resurrection  of 
the  bodies  of  all  men,  previously  to  the  final  judg¬ 
ment.  This  fact  reason  could  never  have  conjec¬ 
tured;  it  must,  from  its  nature,  be  a  matter  of  pure 
revelation.  We  may  indeed  discover  some  remote 
analogy  to  the  resurrection,  in  the  apparent  death 
and  resuscitation  of  vegetables  and  some  animals; 
but  this  could  never  have  authorized  the  conclusion, 
that  the  bodies  of  men,  after  being  mingled  with  the 
dust  of  the  earth,  would  be  reorganized  and  re-ani¬ 
mated  by  the  same  souls  which  were  connected  with 
them  before  their  death.  This  doctrine  however 
is  very  interesting,  and  to  the  pious  must  be  very 
pleasing  and  animating,  as  we  may  learn  from  the 
beautiful  and  striking  description  of  the  resurrec¬ 
tion  given  by  Paul : — “  It  is  sown  in  corruption,  it 
is  raised  in  incorruption;  it  is  sown  in  weakness,  it 
is  raised  in  power;  it  is  sown  a  natural  body,  it  is 
raised  a  spiritual  body;  for  this  corruptible  must 
put  on  incorruption,  and  this  mortal  must  put  on 
immortality.” 

It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  although  the  Scriptures 
express  the  joys  of  heaven,  and  the  miseries  of  hell, 
by  the  strongest  figures,  they  do  not  enter  much  into 
detail  respecting  the  condition  of  men  in  the  future 
world.  There  is  true  wisdom  in  this  silence,  be¬ 
cause  it  is  a  subject  of  which  we  are  at  present  in¬ 
capable  of  forming  any  distinct  conceptions.  Paul, 
after  being  caught  up  to  paradise  and  to  the  third 
heaven,  gave  no  account  of  what  he  saw  and  heard. 


202  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

How  different,  is  this  from  the  ridiculous  description 
of  the  seven  heavens,  by  Mohammed,  and  from  the 
reveries  of  Emanuel  Swedenborg.  The  account  of  a 
future  state  contained  in  the  New  Testament,  is  just 
that  which  is  best  suited  to  our  present  imperfect 
mode  of  conceiving,  and  at  the  same  time  adapted  to 
make  the  deepest  impressions  on  the  minds  of  men. 

The  method  of  obtaining  the  pardon  of  sin,  which 
is  made  known  in  the  Scriptures,  is  so  extraordinary, 
and  yet  so  perfectly  calculated  to  reconcile  the  for¬ 
giveness  of  the  sinner  with  the  justice  and  holiness 
of  God,  that  it  can  scarcely  be  a  mere  human  device. 
The  mission  from  heaven  of  a  person  called  the  Son 
of  God;  his  miraculous  assumption  of  human  nature; 
his  holy  and  benevolent  character;  and  his  laying 
down  his  life  as  an  expiation  for  the  sins  of  men,  are 
indeed  wonderful  events,  but  on  that  account  not 
likely  to  be  the  invention  of  impostors.  The  death 
of  Christ  may  be  considered  the  central  point  in  the 
Christian  system.  This  was  so  far  from  being  an 
incidental  thing,  or  an' event  occurring  in  the  common 
course  of  nature,  that  it  is  every  where  represented 
to  be  the  very  purpose  of  Christ’s  coming  into  the 
world.  This,  according  to  the  gospel,  is  the  grand 
means  of  obtaining  all  blessings  far  sinners.  It  is  the 
great  vicarious  sacrifice  offered  up  to  God  in  behalf 
of  the  people,  in  consequence  of  which  God  can  be 
just  and  the  justifier  of  all  who  believe  in  Jesus.  To 
know  Christ  crucified,  is  to  know  the  whole  gospel; 
to  preach  Christ  crucified,  is  to  preach  the  whole 
gospel ;  for  all  its  doctrines  are  involved  in  this  event. 
The  plan  of  salvation  revealed  in  the  Scriptures  is 
founded  on  the  principle  of  receiving  satisfaction  for 
the  transgressions  of  the  sinner,  from  another  person 
who  is  able  to  render  to  the  law  all  that  is  required 
from  the  offender.  This  satisfaction  was  made  by 
the  obedience  of  Christ  unto  death,  and  is  accepted 
by  the  Judge  of  all  in  place  of  a  perfect  obedience  of 
the  sinner,  in  behalf  of  all  those  to  whom  it  shall  be 
applied.  This  method  of  obtaining  pardon  is  hon¬ 
ourable  to  God,  because  while  he  receives  the  trans- 


EVIDENCES  OE  CHRISTIANITY.  203 

gressor  into  favour,  he  expresses  his  hatred  of  sin  in 
the  strongest  manner,  and  requires  that  the  demands 
of  his  holy  law  be  perfectly  fulfilled ;  and  it  is  suited 
to  man,  for  it  comes  down  to  his  impotence  and 
wretchedness,  and  offers  him  a  finished  and  gratuit¬ 
ous  salvation,  without  works  or  merit  of  his  own. 
And  that  there  may  be  no  room  for  an  abuse  of  this 
doctrine  of  free  grace,  it  is  provided  that  all  who 
hope  for  the  benefits  of  this  redemption  shall  yield  a 
sincere  obedience  to  the  gospel,  and  thus  evince 
their  penitence  for  their  sins,  and  their  love  to  the 
Saviour.  Ungodly  men  may  pervert  this  doctrine 
and  turn  the  grace  of  God  into  licentiousness,  but 
this  receives  no  encouragement  from  the  principles 
of  the  gospel ;  it  is  merely  the  effect  of  the  perverse¬ 
ness  of  sinful  men. 

This  leads  me  to  speak  of  the  third  thing  impor¬ 
tant  to  be  known  by  man,  the  means  by  which  a 
depraved  nature  may  be  restored  to  rectitude,  or 
thorough  reformation  of  a  sinner  be  effected.  On 
this  subject  philosophy  has  never  been  able  to  shed 
any  light.  And  this  is  not  wonderful;  for  the  most 
that  human  wisdom  however  perfect  could  effect, 
would  be  the  direction  and  regulation  of  the  natural 
principles  and  passions  of  men;  but  in  this  way  no 
true  reformation  can  be  produced.  Whatever  changes 
are  effected,  wfill  be  only  from  one  species  of  sin  to 
another.  In  order  to  a  radical  restoration  of  the  soul 
to  moral  rectitude,  or  to  any  degree  of  it,  there  is  a 
necessity  for  the  introduction  into  the  mind  of  some 
new  and  powerful  principle  of  action,  sufficient  to 
counteract  or  expel  the  principles  of  sin.  It  is  in  vain 
that  men  talk,  of  producing  a  restoration  to  virtue  by 
reason:  the  mere  perception  of  the  right  way  will 
answer  no  purpose,  unless  there  is  some  inclination 
to  pursue  it.  Now  the  want  of  virtuous  affections, 
or  to  speak  more  correctly,  of  holy  dispositions,  is  the 
great  defect  of  our  nature,  in  which  our  depravity 
radically  consists;  and  the  only  way  by  which  man 
can  be  led  to  love  and  pursue  the  course  of  obedi¬ 
ence  to  the  law  of  God,  is  by  having  love  to  God 


204 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


and  to  holiness  excited  or  implanted  in  his  soul.  But 
to  effect  this,  is  not  in  the  power  of  any  creature; 
it  is  a  work  which  requires  a  divine  energy,  a  cre¬ 
ating  power;  and  therefore  a  true  conversion  from 
the  ways  of  sin  was  never  effected  without  super¬ 
natural  aid.  There  may  be  an  external  reformation. 
There  may  be,  and  often  is,  a  change  of  governing 
principles.  The  man  who  in  his  youth  was  under 
the  predominant  influence  of  the  love  of  pleasure, 
may  in  advanced  years  fall  completely  under  the 
control  of  avarice  or  ambition;  but  in  every  such 
case,  the  change  is  effected  by  one  active  principle 
becoming  so  strong  as  to  counteract  or  suppress  an¬ 
other.  It  may  be  laid  down  as  a  universal  maxim, 
that  all  changes  of  character  are  brought  about  by 
exciting,  implanting,  or  strengthening,  active  princi¬ 
ples,  sufficient  to  overcome  those  which  before  gov¬ 
erned  the  man. 

Now  let  us  inquire  what  plan  of  reformation  is 
proposed  in  the  Scriptures.  It  is  such  a  one  as  pre¬ 
cisely  accords  with  the  principles  laid  down..  The 
necessity  of  regeneration  by  the  power  of  God  is 
taught  in  almost  every  variety  of  form,  both  in  the 
Old  and  New  Testaments.  The  effect  of  the  divine 
energy  on  the  soul  is  a  new  heart,  or  new  princi¬ 
ples  of  moral  action,  the  leading  exercises  of  which 
are  love  to  God  and  love  to  man.  Let  a  philosophi¬ 
cal  survey  be  taken  of  the  nature  of  man,  with  his 
complete  system  of  perceptions,  passions,  appetites, 
and  affections;  and  then  suppose  this  powerful  and 
holy  principle  introduced  into  the  soul ;  all  the  facul¬ 
ties  and  propensities  of  man  will  be  reduced  to  order, 
and  the  vices  of  our  nature  will  be  eradicated.  Pre¬ 
tenders  to  reason  and  philosophy  have  often  ridiculed 
this  doctrine  as  absurd;  whereas  it  is  in  every  respect 
consistent  with  the  soundest  philosophy.  It  is  the 
very  thing  which  a  wise  philosopher,  who  should 
undertake  to  solve  the  problem,  how  depraved  man 
might  be  restored  to  virtue,  would  demand.  But 
like  the  foundation  which  Archimedes  required  for 
his  lever  to  raise  the  earth,  the  principle  necessary 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  205 

for  a  sinner’s  reformation  is  one  which  reason  and 
philosophy  cannot  furnish.  The  Bible  is  the  only 
hook  which  ever  taught  the  true  method  of  purifying 
the  soul  from  sin.  A  thousand  ineffectual  devices 
have  been  tried  by  philosophers  and  devotees  of  other 
systems.  One  of  the  most  common  has  been  to  en¬ 
deavour  to  extricate  the  soul  from  the  influence  of 
the  body,  by  various  methods  of  mortification  and 
purgation;  but  all  these  plans  have  adopted  the  false 
principle,  that  the  body  is  the  chief  seat  of  depravity, 
and  therefore  they  have  ever  proved  unsuccessful. 
The  disease  lies  deeper,  and  is  further  removed  from 
the  roach  of  their  remedies  than  they  supposed.  It 
is  the  gospel  which  teaches  the  true  philosophy  res¬ 
pecting  the  seat  of  sin  and  its  cure.  Out  of  the  heart 
proceed  all  evils,  -according  to  the  Bible.  And  if  we 
would  make  the  fruit  good,  we  must  first  make  the 
tree  good.  This  necessity  of  divine  agency  to  make 
men  truly  virtuous,  does  not,  however,  supersede  the 
use  of  means,  or  exclude  the  operation  of  rational 
motives.  When  a  new  principle  is  introduced  into 
a  rational  mind,  the  soul  in  the  exercise  of  this  prin¬ 
ciple  is  governed  by  the  same  general  laws  of  under¬ 
standing  and  choice  as  before.  The  principle  of 
piety  is  pre-eminently  a  rational  principle  in  its  ope¬ 
ration.  God  is  loved  because  he  is  now  viewed  to 
be  a  most  excellent  and  amiable  being.  Heaven  is 
preferred  to  earth,  because  it  is  seen  to  be  a  far  better 
and  more  enduring  inheritance ;  and  so  of  all  other 
exercises. 

I  am  naturally  led  from  the  consideration  of  this 
subject  to  speak  of  the  moral  system  of  the  New 
Testament.  I  confine  my  remarks  here  to  the  New 
Testament,  not  because  it  teaches  a  different  rule  of 
moral  duty  from  the  Old,  but  because  it  teaches  it 
more  clearly.  I  need  say  nothing  in  general  com¬ 
mendation  of  the  moral  precepts  of  the  gospel;  they 
have  extorted  the  highest  praise  from  many  of  the 
most  determined  enemies  of  Christianity.  No  man 
has  been  able  to  show  how  they  could  be  improved 
in  any  one  point.  It  has  sometimes,  indeed,  been 

IS 


206 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


objected  that  this  system  was  not  suited  to  man,  be¬ 
cause  it  requires  a  purity  and  perfection  to  which  he 
can  never  attain;  but  the  objection  concedes  the  very 
point  which  we  wish  to  establish — the  absolute  per¬ 
fection  of  the  gospel  system  of  morality.  It  surely 
requires  no  argument  to  prove  that  if  God  revealed 
a  rule  for  the  regulation  of  his  creatures,  it  will  be  a 
perfect  rule.  It  will  never  do  to  admit,  that  the  law 
must  be  lowered  in  its  demands  to  adapt  it  to  the 
imperfection  of  creatures.  This  would  be  destructive 
of  all  law. 

It  has  again  been  objected,  that  in  the  precepts  of 
the  New  Testament  many  splendid  virtues  acknow¬ 
ledged  by  the  heathen  moralists  have  been  omitted. 
Patriotism,  friendship,  bravery,  &c.,  have  been  spe¬ 
cified  as  belonging  to  this  class.  To  which  we  reply, 
that  so  far  as  patriotism  and  friendship  are  moral  vir¬ 
tues,  they  are  included  in  the  general  precepts  of  the 
gospel,  which  require  us  to  love  our  fellow  men  and 
do  them  good;  and  in  those  which  command  us  to 
think  of  “  whatsoever  things  are  lovely,  whatsoever 
things  are  of  good  report ;”  but  when  the  love  of 
country  and  attachment  to  a  friend  interfere  with  the 
general  obligation  of  loving  all  men,  they  are  no 
longer  virtues,  but  vices. 

The  excellence  of  the  moral  system  of  the  New 
Testament  will  be  manifest  if  we  consider, 

1.  Its  simple  yet  comprehensive  character.  All 
moral  duties  which  can  be  Conceived  as  obligatory, 
are  here  reduced  to  two  grand  principles,  the  love  of 
God  and  the  love  of  man.  The  measure  of  the  first 
is  the  full  extent  of  our  capacity;  of  the  second,  the 
love  which  we  have  for  ourselves.  “  On  these  two,” 
says  Christ,  “hang  all  the  law  and  the  prophets.” 
The  duties  which  relate  to  temperance  and  self-gov¬ 
ernment,  do  not  need  any  additional  principle.  If 
the  soul  be  filled  with  love  to  man,  self-love  will  be 
so  regulated  and  directed  as  to  answer  every  purpose 
in  moving  us  to  perform  what  has  been  called  our 
duty  to  ourselves. 

2.  The  precepts  of  morality,  in  the  New  Testa- 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


207 


ment,  although  sometimes  expressed  in  comprehen¬ 
sive  language,  are  often  applied  to  the  actual  rela¬ 
tions  and  various  conditions  of  men.  We  are  not 
left  to  infer  particular  duties  from  general  princi¬ 
ples,  but  the  duties  of  individuals,  according  to  their 
circumstances,  are  distinctly  enjoined.  Parents  and 
children,  husbands  and  wives,  magistrates  and  sub¬ 
jects,  masters  and  servants,  ministers  and  people,  the 
rich  and  the  poor,  the  friend  and  the  stranger,  have 
all  their  respective  duties  clearly  marked  out. 

3.  Moral  duties  which  have  been  overlooked  or 
misunderstood  by  other  teachers,  are  here  prominent¬ 
ly  exhibited  and  solemnly  inculcated.  The  virtues 
of  humility,  meekness,  forbearance,  and  the  forgive¬ 
ness  of  injuries,  were  not  acknowledged  by  the  hea¬ 
then  moralists;  but  in  the  New  Testament  they  are 
made  to  assume  their  proper  place,  and  much  of  true 
goodness  is  made  to  consist  in  their  exercise.  At  the 
time  of  the  advent  of  Christ,  many  false  principles  of 
morality  had  gained  currency.  The  duty  of  loving 
all  men  had  been  circumscribed  within  narrow  limits. 
Men  charged  with  heresy,  as  the  Samaritans,  or  no¬ 
torious  sinners,  as  the  publicans,  were  by  the  Jews 
considered  as  properly  excluded  from  all  participa¬ 
tion  in  their  kindness  or  courtesy.  The  duty  of  sub¬ 
jection  to  a  foreign  power  by  which  they  had  been 
conquered,  and  especially  the  duty  of  yielding  obedi¬ 
ence  to  a  wicked  tyrannical  prince,  was  one  on  which 
it  required  much  wisdom  to  decide  aright.  The  peo¬ 
ple  were  divided  among  themselves  on  this  point;  it 
was  therefore  selected  by  a  combination  of  both  par¬ 
ties  as  a  fit  subject  to  entangle  our  Lord,  by  obliging 
him  to  decide  one  way  or  the  other,  and  thus  expose 
himself  to  the  opposition  of  one  of  the  parties.  But 
when  they  asked  him  whether  it  was  lawful  to  give 
tribute  unto  Caesar  or  not,  he  called  for  a  denarius , 
and  looking  at  the  image  stamped  upon  it,  asked 
whose  it  was;  and  upon  being:  answered  Caesar’s, 
made  the  following  remarkable  reply:  “  Render  unto 
Caesar  the  tilings  that  are  Caesar’s,  and  unto  God  the 
things  that  are  God’s.”  By  which  he  decided  that, 


208 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


inasmuch  as  they  permitted  the  coin  of  Csesar  to 
circulate  among  them,  which  was  an  evidence  of  his 
sovereignty  over  them,  and  availed  themselves  of 
this  money  for  purposes  of  trade,  there  could  be  no 
impropriety  in  rendering  to  Csesar  what  properly 
belonged  to  him;  and  also  that  this  was  not  incom¬ 
patible  with  their  allegiance  to  God.  So  that  virtu¬ 
ally  in  this  answer,  he  reproved  both  the  pharisees 
and  the  Herodians;  the  former  of  whom  made  their 
duty  to  God  a  pretext  for  refusing  to  pay  tribute  to 
the  Emperor;  and  the  latter,  to  secure  the  favour  of 
the  reigning  powers,  neglected  their  duty  to  God. 

Paul,  living  under  the  government  of  Nero,  pre¬ 
scribes  obedience  to  the  existing  powers,  not  from 
fear  of  suffering  their  displeasure,  but  for  conscience, 9 
sake.  This  is  the  general  rule  of  duty  on  this  diffi¬ 
cult  subject,  than  which  none  can  be  wiser;  but  it 
must  not  be  considered  as  inculcating  passive  obedi¬ 
ence  and  non-resistance  in  all  cases.  Yet  as  long  as 
a  government  has  authority,  so  long  we  are  bound 
to  obey.  Christianity  is  so  constituted  as  not  to  inter¬ 
fere  with  any  civil  institution.  It  takes  men  as  it 
finds  them,  in  all  the  relations  of  life,  and  teaches 
them  their  duty.  It  never  can  therefore  be  the  cause 
of  sedition  and  opposition  to  existing  governments. 
It  considers  all  civil  rulers  as  the  ministers  of  God, 
for  the  peace  and  good  order  of  society,  and  for  the 
punishment  of  those  that  do  evil.  It  is  made  the 
duty  of  Christians  therefore  to  be  “  subject  unto  the 
higher  powers,  and  not  to  resist  the  ordinance  of 
God;  to  render  to  all  their  dues;  tribute  to  whom 
tribute  is  due,  custom  to  whom  custom,  fear  to  whom 
fear,  honour  to  whom  honour.”*  But  when  they, 
who  have  the  right  to  change  the  government  of  a 
country  exeicise  it,  and  put  down  one  set  of  rulers 
and  set  up  another,  the  principle  of  Christian  duty 
remains  the  same.  And  if  in  any  country  Christians 
form  a  majority  of  the  nation,  there  is  no  reason  why 
they  may  not  exercise  this  right  of  new-modelling 
their  government,  or  changing  their  rulers,  as  well  as 
others. 


*  Rom.  xiii. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


209 


4.  The  moral  system  of  the  New  Testament  traces 
all  virtue  to  the  heart,  and  sets  no  value  on  the  most 
splendid  and  costly  offerings,  or  the  most  punctilious 
discharge  of  religious  duties  when  the  motives  are 
not  pure.  The  first  inclination,  of  the  mind  to  an 
illicit  object  is  denounced  to  be  a  violatiomof  the  law; 
and  words  of  reproach,  and  all  idle  words,  are  among 
the  sins  for  which  an  account  must  be  given  in  the 
judgment.  Prayers  and  alms  proceeding  from  vain 
glory  are  represented  as  receiving  no  reward  from 
God,  however  they  may  be  applauded  by  men.  The 
love  of  this  world,  and  the  love  of  money,  are  re¬ 
presented  as  radical  sins,  from  which  many  others 
proceed.  Pride  and  revenge  are  exhibited  as  not 
only  odious^  but  incompatible  with  the  divine  favour. 
Purity  of  heart  and  heavenly-mindedness,  with  trust 
in  God  and  submission  to  his  will,  are  in  this  system, 
cardinal  virtues. 

5.  The  moral  precepts  of  the  New  Testament  were 
exemplified  in  the  lives  of  the  apostles  and  primitive 
Christians;  but  especially,  and  to  the  utmost  perfec¬ 
tion,  in  the  example  of  Jesus  Christ.  It  is  impossible 
to  conceive  a  character  more  perfect  than  that  given 
by  the  evangelists,  of  the'  founder  of  the  Christian 
religion;  and  it  has  already  been  observed,  that  this 
character,  embracing  every  variety  of  excellence, 
often  exhibited  in  delicate  and  difficult  circumstances, 
is  delineated  by  a  simple  narrative  of  facts.  There 
is  no  panegyric,  no  effort  or  art  to  excite  admiration; 
the  writers  merely  inform  us  what  Jesus  said,  did, 
and  suffered.  From  this  narrative  we  learn  that  he 
connected  himself  with  no  sect,  and  courted  the 
favour  of  neither  the  rich  nor  the  poor.  He  adopted 
none  of  the  errors  or  prejudices  of  his  nation;  but  by 
his  discourses  and  his  conduct  showed  that  he  acted 
from  far  higher  views  than  national  prejudices.  The 
apparent  sanctity  of  the  Pharisees  he  denounced  as 
hypocrisy;  the  traditions  of  the  elders,  as  subversive 
of  the  law  of  God;  the  skeptical  opinions  of  the  Sad- 
ducees,  as  proceeding  from  ignorance  of  the  true 
meaning  of  the  Scriptures. 

18* 


210 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


Jesus  Christ  continually  turned  the  attention  of  his 
hearers  from  earthly  to  heavenly  things,  as  alone 
worthy  of  their  attention  and  pursuits.  Although  he 
flattered  no  class  of  men,  his  attention  was  particu¬ 
larly  directed  to  the  poor ;  their  spiritual  necessities 
and  their  bodily  afflictions  excited  his  most  tender 
compassion;  and  to  them  he  addressed  many  kind 
and  encouraging  declarations.  But  his  healing  power 
was  exerted  in  behalf  of  •  all  applicants,  rich  and 
poor ;  and  without  regard  to  their  sect  or  nation. 
Jews,  Samaritans,  heathens,  publicans,  and  sinners, 
were  the  objects  of  his  compassion.  He  was  not 
deterred  by  the  proud  prejudices  of  the  Scribes  and 
Pharisees  from  associating  with  penitents,  however 
vile  and  infamous  they  had  before  been.  He  gra¬ 
ciously  received  returning,  sinners,  and  comforted 
them  with  the  assurance  of  pardon,  and  permitted 
them  to  manifest  their  grateful  affection  to  his  person, 
by  the  most  expressive  signs  and  actions.  He  mani¬ 
fested  the  kindest  sympathy  with  his  friends  in  their 
afflictions,  weeping  with  those  that  wept,  and  often 
exerting  his  omnipotence  in  raising  their  dear  rela¬ 
tions  from  the  bed  of  sickness  or  from  death.  And 
although  he  often  uttered  severe  rebukes  against  the 
incorrigibly  wicked,  and  was  sometimes  grieved  and 
angry  with  them,  yet  his  compassion  towards  them 
never  failed;  and  even  when  their  day  of  grace  was 
ended,  he  wept  over  them  with  the  most  affecting 
tenderness. 

Jesus  Christ  was  often  brought  into  conflict  with 
insidious,  malignant,  and  learned  adversaries.  They 
attacked  him  with  deliberate  craft,  and  proposed  to 
him  questions  on  delicate  and  difficult  subjects,  to 
which  he  was  required  to  return  an  immediate  an¬ 
swer;  but  in  no  case  of  this  sort  was  he  ever  con¬ 
founded,  or  even  puzzled  by  the  cunning  craftiness 
of  his  enemies.  His  answers  were  so  appropriate 
and  so  fraught  with  wisdom,  that  his  adversaries 
were  commonly  confounded  and  the  audience  filled 
with  admiration. 

The  parables  of  Christ  are  unparalleled  for  beauty 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY". 


211 


and  force,  in  the  species  of  composition  to  which  they 
belong.  But  this  is  the  smallest  part  of  their  excel¬ 
lence.  They  contain  so  much  important  truth,  and 
so  happily  adapted  to  the  subject  and  the  occasion, 
that  the  persons  intended  to  be  reproved  by  them 
were  often  constrained  to  give  judgment  against 
themselves.  In  these  discourses,  the  leading  doc¬ 
trines  of  the  gospel  are  exhibited  in  a  beautiful  dress 
of  allegory,  which  rivets  the  attention  and  greatly 
aids  us  in  understanding  the  fulness  and  freeness  of 
the  grace  of  the  gospel.  They  are  also  prophetical 
of  the  rejection  of  the  Jews  and  of  the  calling  of 
the  Gentiles;  of  the  various  reception  of  the  gospel 
by  different  classes  of  hearers;  of  the  mixture  of 
sincere  and  unsound  Christians  in  the  Church;  of  the 
cruel  persecutions  which  the  followers  of  Christ 
should  endure;  and  of  the  final  overthrow  and  de¬ 
struction  of  his  enemies. 

Jesus  Christ  spake,  in  all  his  discourses,  as  never 
man  spake.  He  removed  the  false  glosses  which 
had  been  put  on  the  law,  and  set  its  precepts  in 
their  proper  light.  He  mingled  the  dogmas  of  no 
philosophical  system  with  his  instructions.  He  en¬ 
tered  into  no  metaphysical  and  abstruse  disquisitions, 
but  taught  the  truth  with  simplicity  and  authority. 

His  zeal  for  the  honour  of  God  and  for  the  purify 
and  sanctity  of  his  worship,  and  his  dislike  of  all 
human  inventions  and  will- worship,  are  manifest  in 
all  his  conduct.  A  spirit  of  fervent  and  elevated 
devotion  was  a  remarkable  characteristic  of  Jesus 
of  Nazareth.  Whole  nights  he  spent  in  prayer; 
and  before  day  he  would  retire  for  the  purposes  of 
devotion.  He  was  in  the  habit  of  praying  and  giv¬ 
ing  thanks  on  all  occasions;  but  his  devotion  was 
free  from  all  tincture  of  superstition  or  enthusiasm 
He  taught  that  not  the  words,  but  the  heart,  not  the 
length  of  prayers,  but  their  spirit  was  regarded. 

His  benevolence,  meekness,  and  laborious  dili¬ 
gence,  in  promoting  the  welfare  of  men,  were  mani¬ 
fested  every  day  of  his  life.  But  in  his  acts  of  mercy, 
and  in  his  most  extraordinary  miracles,  there  was  no 


212  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

appearance  of  parade  or  ostentation.  He  went  about 
doing  good,  but  he  sought  no  glory  from  men.  He 
was  humble,  retired,  and  contented  with  the  lowest 
state  of  poverty.  When  the  people  applauded  him, 
he  withdrew  to  some  other  place.  When  they  would 
have  made  him  a  king,  he  escaped  from  their  hands. 
When  they  asked  curious  questions,  he  directed  them 
to  something  important.  When  they  uttered  un¬ 
meaning  expressions  of  praise,  he  took  occasion  to 
announce  some  important  truth  or  deliver  some  in¬ 
teresting  discourse. 

In  nothing  did  he  discover  more  profound  wisdom, 
than  in  declining  to  interfere  in  any  case  with  tempo¬ 
ral  concerns,  and  disputes  about,  earthly  possessions. 
He  showed  by  his  conduct,  what  he  solemnly  declar¬ 
ed  on  his  trial,  that  “his  kingdom  was  not  of  this 
world.” 

In  his  intercourse  with  his  disciples,  we  observe  a 
sweet  mixture  of  dignity  and  gentleness,  of  faithful¬ 
ness  and  humble  condescension  to  their  weakness 
and  prejudices.  No  wonder  that  they  should  love 
such  a  Master.  His  last  discourses  with  them  before 
his  passion,  and  the  remarkable  prayer  offered  on 
their  behalf,  for  affectionate  tenderness  and  the  sweet 
spirit  of  consolation  which  pervade  them,  are  alto¬ 
gether  inimitable.  How  flat  and  unsatisfactory  are 
the  conversations  of  Socrates  with  his  friends,  when 
compared  with  those  of  Christ  recorded  in  the  four¬ 
teenth,  fifteenth  and  sixteeth  chapters  of  the  gospel 
of  St.  John.  Indeed  it  would  be  impossible  to  refer 
to  any  discourses,  in  any  language,  which  could  bear 
a  comparison  with  this  valedictory  of  Christ  :  and  to 
enhance  our  admiration  of  the  pure  benevolence  of 
the  author,  he  was  aware  that  his  own  sufferings 
were  near  and  would  be  most  cruel  and  ignominious; 
and  vet  his  attention  is  turned  to  the  case  of  his  sor¬ 
rowful  disciples,  and  all  that  he  says  has  relation  to 
them.  The  institution  of  the  Eucharistical  Sup¬ 
per,  intended  to  be  commemorative  of  his  death,  was 
attended  with  circumstances  which  exhibit  the  char¬ 
acter  of  Jesus  in  a  very  peculiar  and  interesting  light. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  213 

This  scene  will  be  best  understood  by  a  perusal  of 
the  simple  and  affecting  narrative  of  the  evangelists. 

The  last  thing  in  the  character  of  Christ,  which  I 
shall  bring  into  view  at  this  time,  is  the  patience  and 
fortitude  with  which  he  endured  sufferings  intense 
and  overwhelming  beyond  conception.  There  is 
something  mysterious  in  this  whole  affair.  The  in¬ 
tense  agonies  which  Jesus  suffered,  seem  to  have  had 
no  connexion  with  external  circumstances.  When 
he  was  betrayed,  deserted,  and  arrested,  he  discover¬ 
ed  no  signs  of  fear  or  perturbation.  He  gave  him¬ 
self  up,  and  submitted  with  unruffled  composure  to 
every  species  of  contumely  and  insult.  While  his 
trial  was  going  on  before  the  Sanhedrim,  and  before 
Pilate,  he  maintained,  for  the  most  part,  a  dignified 
silence,  uttering  no  reproaches  or  complaints;  not 
even  speaking  in  his  own  defence.  When  particu¬ 
larly  interrogated  by  the  judges,  he  answered  direct¬ 
ly  to  the  questions  proposed,  and  avowed  himself  to 
be  the  Messiah,  the  Son  of  God,  and  the  King  of 
Israel.  Under  the  mockery  and  insult  which  were 
heaped  upon  him,  he  remained  perfectly  composed, 
and  uttered  not  a  word  indicative  of  impatience  or 
resentment.  “  As  a  sheep  before  her  shearers  is 
dumb,  so  he  opened  not  his  mouth.”  When  he 
was  bewailed  by  the  daughters  of  Jerusalem,  as  he 
ascended  the  hill  of  Calvary,  bearing  his  cross,  he 
requested  them  not  to  weep  for  him,  but  for  them¬ 
selves  and  their  children,  on  account  of  the  calamitties 
that  were  coming  on  that  devoted  city.  While  sus¬ 
pended  on  the  cross,  he  saw  his  beloved  mother  among 
the  spectators,  and  knowing  that  she  would  need  a 
friend  and  protector,  he  recommended  her  to  the  care, 
of  the  disciple  he  most  tenderly  loved.  Although  no 
compassion  was  mingled  with  the  vindictive  feelings 
with  which  he  was  persecuted,  he  set  a  glorious  ex¬ 
ample  of  that  most  difficult  duty,  love  to  enemies. 
As  says  the  apostle  Peter,  “  Because  Christ  also  suf¬ 
fered  for.  us,  leaving  us  an  example,  that  ye  should 
follow  his  steps:  who  did  no  sin,  neither  was  guile 
found-  in  his  mouth ;  who,  when  he  was  reviled, 


214  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

< 

reviled  not  again;  when  he  suffered,  he  threatened 
not,  but  committed  himself  to  him  that  judgeth  right¬ 
eously.’’  Among  his  last  words,  before  he  expired, 
was  a  prayer  for  those  that  were  then  engaged  in 
crucifying  him;  “Father,  forgive  them,  for  they 
know  not  what  they  do.”  A  penitent  thief,  who  was 
crucified  with  him,  implored  his  blessing  and  remem¬ 
brance,  when  he  should  come  to  the  possession  of 
his  kingdom;  he  replied,  “This  day  shalt  thou  be 
with  me  in  Paradise.”  And  finally, he  said,  “Father, 
into  thy  hands  I  commit  my  spirit,”  and  bowed  his 
head  and  died. 

The  moral  excellence  of  the  character  of  Christ  is 
very  remarkable,  as  uniting,  in  perfection,  qualities 
which  among  men  are  considered  almost  incompati¬ 
ble.  He  exhibited  a  complete  indifference  to  the 
possessions  and  glory  of  the  world  and  a  devout  and 
heavenly  temper,  without  the  least  mixture  of  aus¬ 
terity.  He  combined  uniform  dignity  with  humility 
and  condescension;  manifested  strong  indignation 
against  all  manner  of  sin  and  against  impenitent 
sinners,  but  the  most  affectionate  tenderness  towards 
every  humble  penitent.  He  united  the  spirit  of  ele¬ 
vated  devotion  with  a  life  of  activity  and  incessant 
exertion.  While  he  held  free  intercourse  with  men 
of  all  classes,  he  adopted  the  prejudices  and  spared 
the  vices  of  none.  On  this  subject,  I  will  quote  a 
passage  from  an  excellent  discourse  of  Dr.  Channing, 
before  referred  to:  “I  will  only  observe,”  says  the 
eloquent  author,  speaking  of  the  character  of  Christ, 
“  that  it  had  one  distinction,  which,  more  than  any 
thing,  forms  a  perfect  character.  It  was  made  up  of 
contrasts:  in  other  words  it  was  a  union  of  excellen¬ 
cies  which  are  not  easily  reconciled,  which  seem  at 
first  sight  incongruous,  but  which,  when  blended  and 
duly  proportioned,  constitute  moral  harmony,  and 
attract  with  equal  power,  love,  and  veneration.  For 
example,  we  discover  in  Jesus  Christ  an  unparalleled 
dignity  of  character,  a  consciousness  of  greatness, 
never  discovered  or  approached  by  any  other  indi¬ 
vidual  in  history;  and  yet  this  was  blended  with 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  215 

-f  _» 

f  >  'i 

a  condescension,  loveliness,  and  unostentatious  sim¬ 
plicity,  which  had  never  before  been  thought  consis¬ 
tent  with  greatness.  In  like  manner,  he  united  an 
utter  superiority  to  the  world,  to  its  pleasures  and 
ordinary  interests,  with  suavity  of  manners,  and  free¬ 
dom  from  austerity.  He  joined  to  strong  feeling  and 
self-possession,  an  indignant  sensibility  to  sin,  and 
compassion  to  the  sinner ;  an  intense  devotion  to  his 
work,  and  calmness  under  opposition  and  ill  success; 
a  universal '  philanthropy,  and  a  susceptibility  of 
private  attachments;  the  authority  which  became  the 
Saviour  of  the  world,  and  the  tenderness  and  grati¬ 
tude  of  a  son.” 

The  salutary  effects  of  Christianity  on  communities 
and  individuals  open  a  wide  field  for  important  re¬ 
marks.  It  is  a  subject  which  we  have  not  time  to 
pursue,  yet  we  must  not  pass  it  over  in  entire  silence. 
The  argument  from  this  topic  may  however  be  redu¬ 
ced  to  a  point.  Take  a  survey  of  the  whole  world, 
at  this  time,  and  let  an  impartial  judgment  be  formed 
of  the  condition  of  all  the  nations;  and  let  the  ques¬ 
tion  be  answered,  whether  Christian  nations  are  in  a 
less  favourable  or  more  favourable  condition  than 
others.  And  again,  whether  among  Christians,  those 
nations  who  have  the  free  use  of  the  Bible,  and  are 
carefully  instructed  in  the  doctrines  of  Christianity, 
are  in  a  better  or  worse  condition  than  those  to  whom 
the  Scriptures  are  interdicted,  and  who  are  permitted 
to  remain  in  ignorance  of  the  religion  which  they 
profess?  The  answers  of  these  questions  are  so  ob¬ 
vious,  that  I  cannot  but  presume,  that  all  readers 
will  be  of  the  same  mind.  It  may  then  be  asked, 
would  a  vile  imposture  be  the  means  of  meliorating 
the  condition  of  the  world,  and  prove  salutary  in 
proportion  as  it  is  known  and  obeyed?  “  I  speak  as 
unto  wise  men,  judge  ye  what  I  say.” 

We  have  moreover  seen,  in  our  own  time,  the 
wonderful  effects  of  the  gospel,  in  civilizing  some  of 
the  most  barbarous  people  on  the  face  of  the  earth. 
Men  who  seemed  to  be  sunk  to  a  level  with  the 
beasts,  have  been  reclaimed,  enlightened,  and  exalt* 


216 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


ed,  to  a  participation  of  the  blessings  of  civilized 
life,  their  ferocious  temper  being  completely  subdued 
and  softened.  Look  at  Greenland,  at  Africa,  at  the 
islands  of  the  Pacific ;  and  nearer  home,  at  the  Che- 
rokees,  Choctaws,  and  other  Indian  tribes,  and  see 
what  the  gospel  can  effect.  I  know  not  what  infi¬ 
dels  think  of  these  things,  but  for  my  own  part,  I 
should  not  esteem  one  coming  from  the  dead,  or  a 
voice  of  thunder  from  heaven,  so  undoubted  an  evi¬ 
dence  of  the  truth  of  the  gospel,  as  these  effects. 
Will  a  series  of  falsehoods  produce  such  effects  as 
these  ? 

I  know  that  it  has  been  objected,  that  Christianity 
has  been  the  cause  of  many  bloody  wars  and  cruel 
persecutions ;  but  this  is  impossible.  That  religion 
which  breathes  nothing  but  benevolence  and  peace, 
and -which  requires  its  disciples  not  to  resist  evil,  but 
freely  to  forgive  their  most  malignant  enemies,  can 
never  be  the  cause  of  war  and  persecution.  It  may 
indeed  be  the  occasion ,  and  no  doubt  has  been  made 
the  occasion  of  such  evils ;  but  it  would  be  absurd 
to  attribute  to  Christianity  the  evils  of  which  it  has 
been  the  occasion,  when  its  own  spirit  is  in  direct 
opposition  to  those  evils.  As  well  might  we  charge 
civil  government  with  all  the  wars  and  tumults 
which  it  has  occasioned.  As  reasonably  might  we 
accuse  liberty,  as  being  the  cause  of  all  the  atrocities 
of  the  French  revolution.  The  wickedness  of  man 
is  the  cause  of  these  evils ;  and  the  most  excellent 
things  in  the  universe,  may  be  made  the  occasion 
of  exciting  it,  or  calling  it  into  exercise.  Christ  fore¬ 
told  that  his  religion  would  be  an  occasion  of  family 
discord ;  and  to  express  the  certainty  of  the  event 
predicted,  he  said,  “  Think  not  that  I  am  come  to 
send  peace  on  earth ;  I  came  not  to  send  peace,  but 
a  sword;  ”  which  some  superficial  readers  have 
strangely  misconstrued,  as  though  he  had  signified 
that  it  was  the  tendency  of  his  religion  to  produce 
strife  among  friends.  No  man  can  remain  in  error 
on  this  subject  who  will  take  the  pains  to  read  the 
New  Testament.  And  I  will  venture  to  predict,  or 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  217 

rather  to  repeat  what  is  already  predicted,  that  as 
soon  as  the  world  shall  sincerely  embrace  the  Chris¬ 
tian  religion,  wars  will  cease  to  the  ends  of  the  earth. 
Then  shall  men  heat  their  swords  into  plough-shares 
and  their  spears  into  pruning-hooks,  and  learn  war 
no  more. 

But  the  salutary  effects  of  the  gospel  on  those  indi¬ 
viduals  who  cordially  embrace  it,,  furnish  the  most 
manifest  proof  of  its  divinity.  How  often,  by  the 
secret  powerful  influence  of  the  truths  of  the  Bible, 
have  the  proud  been  humbled;  the  impure  rendered 
chaste;  the  unjust  honest;  the  cruel  and  revengeful, 
meek  and  forgiving;  the  drunkard,  temperate;  the 
profane,  reverent;  and  the  false  swearer  and  liar, 
conscientious  in  declaring  nothing  but  the  truth.  Un¬ 
der  the  influence  of  what  other  system  are  such  salu¬ 
tary  changes  effected?  Will  it  be  said  that  many 
who  profess  to  experience  such  a  change  prove 
themselves  to  be  hypocrites?  Admitted;  but  does 
this  evince  that  they  who  give  evidence  of  sincerity 
by  the  most  incontestable  proofs,  all  their  lives,  are 
also  hypocrites?  All  men  wish  to  be  thought  hon¬ 
est;  but  if  many  are  discovered  to  be  knaves,  does 
this  prove  that  there  is  not  an  honest  man  in  the 
world  ? 

However  this  argument  may  affect  those  who  have 
had  no  experience  of  the  power  of  the  gospel,  it  will 
have  great  weight  with  all  who  have,  by  means  of 
the  truth,  been  converted  from  the  error  of  their 
ways.  There  are  thousands  who  can  attest  that  they 
have  experienced  the  salutary  efficacy  of  the  Bible, 
in  turning  them  away  from  their  iniquities  and  en¬ 
kindling  within  them  the  love  of  God  and  of  virtue. 
They  cannot  but  believe  that  the  Christian  religion 
is  from  God,  and  are  persuaded  that  no  imposture 
could  so  elevate  and  sanctify  the  mind,  that  no 
human  device  could  possess  such  a  power  over  the 
conscience  and  the  heart,  as  they  have  experienced 
from  the  Scriptures.  These  persons,  therefore,  may 
truly  be  said  to  have  the  witness  of  the  truth  in  them¬ 
selves.  •  ' 


19 


218 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY, 


But  there  is  an  efficacy  in  the  truths  of  the  Bible, 
not  only  to  guide  and  sanctify,  but  also  to  afford  con¬ 
solation  to  the  afflicted  in  body  or  mind.  The  gospel 
brings  peace  into  every  bosom  where  it  is  cordially 
received.  When  the  conscience  is  pierced  with  the 
stings  of  guilt,  and  the  soul  writhes  under  a  wound 
which  no  human  medicine  can  heal,  the  promises  of 
the  gospel  are  like  the  balm  of  Gilead,  a  sovereign 
cure  for  this  intolerable  and  deeply-seated  malady. 
Under  its  cheering  influence,  the  broken  spirit  is 
healed  and  the  burden  of  despair  is  removed  far 
away.  The  gospel,  like  an  angel  of  mercy,  can  bring 
consolation  into  the  darkest  scenes  of  adversity;  it 
can  penetrate  the  dungeon,  and  sooth  the  sorrows  of 
the  penitent  in  his  chains,  and  on  his  bed  of  straw. 
It  has  power 'to  give  courage  to  the  heart,  and  .to 
brighten  the  countenance  of  the  man  who  meets 
death  on  the  scaffold  or  on  the  gibbet,  if  its'  precious 
invitations  to  the  chief  of  sinners  be  sincerely  em¬ 
braced.  It  mitigates  the  sorrows,  of  the  bereaved, 
and  wipes  away  the  bitter  tears  occasioned  by  the 
painful  separation  of  affectionate  friends  and  rela¬ 
tives.  By  the  bright  prospects  which  it  opens,  and 
the  lively  hopes  which  it  inspires,  the  darkness  of  the 
tomb  is  illumined;  so  that  Christians  are  enabled,  in 
faith  of  the  resurrection  of  the  body,  to  corUmit  the 
remains  of  their  dearest  friends  to  the  secure  sepul¬ 
chre,  in  confident  hope  that  after  a  short  sleep  they 
will  awake  to  life  everlasting. 

The  cottages  of  the  poor  are  often  blessed  with  the 
consolation  of  the  gospel,  which  is  peculiarly  adapted 
to  the  children  of  affliction  and  poverty.  It  was  one 
of  the  signs  of  Jesus  being  the  true  Messiah,  “  that 
the  poor  had  the  gospel  preached  unto  them.”  Here 
it  produces  contentment,  resignation,  mutual  kind¬ 
ness,  and  the  longing  after  immortality.  The  aged 
and  infirm,  who,  by  the  gradual  failure  of  their  fac¬ 
ulties,  or  by  disease  and  decrepitude  are  shut  out 
from  the  business  and  enjoyments  of  this  world,  may 
find  in  the  word  of  God  a  fountain  of  consolation. 
They  may,  while  imbued  with  its  celestial  spirit,  look 


I 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY.  219 

upon  the  world  without  the  least  regret  for  its  loss, 
and  may  rejoice  in  the  prospect  before  them,  with  a 
joy  unspeakable  and  full  of  glory.  The  gospel  can 
render  tolerable  even  the  yoke  of  slavery  and  the 
chains  of  the  oppressor.  How  often  is  the  pious 
slave,  through  the  blessed  influence  of  the  word  of 
God,  a  thousand  times  happier  than  his  master!  He 
cares  not  for  the  short  deprivation  of  liberty;  he 
knows  and  feels  that  he  is  “  Christ’s  freeman,”  and 
believes  “  that  all  things  work  together  for  his  good,” 
and  that  “  these  light  afflictions  which  are  for  a  mo¬ 
ment,  will  work  out  for  him  a  far  more  exceeding 
and  eternal  weight  of  glory!”  Nay,  this  glorious 
gospel  is  an  antidote  to  death  itself.  He  that  does 
the  sayings  of  Christ  shall  never  taste  of  death;  that 
is,  of  death  as  a  curse:  he  shall  never  feel  the  enven¬ 
omed  sting  of  death.  How  often  does  it  overspread 
the  spirit  of  the  departing  saint  with  serenity !  How 
often  does  it  elevate,  and  fill  with  celestial  joy,  the 
soul  which  is  just  leaving  the  earthly  house  of  this 
tabernacle !  It  actually  renders,  in  many  instances, 
the  bed  of  the  dying  a  place  of  sweet  repose.  No  ter¬ 
rors  hover  over  them;  no  anxious  care  corrodes  their 
spirit;  no  burden  oppresses  their  heart.  All  is  light ; 
all  is  hope  and  assurance ;  all  is  joy  and  triumph. 

The  question  to  be  decided  is,  whether  a  book 
which  is  replete  with  such  sublime  and  correct  views 
of  theology;  which  exhibits  the  true  history  and 
true  character  of  man,  without  flattery,  distortion,  or 
exaggeration;  which  possesses  such  an  astonishing 
power  of  penetrating  the  human  heart  and  affecting 
the  conscience;  which  gives  us  information  on  the 
vCry  points  with  which  it  is  most  important  we 
should  be  acquainted;  which  opens  to  us  the  future 
world,  and  shows  us  how  we  may  attain  its  felicity 
and  glory;  which  exhibits  a  perfect  system  of  moral 
duty  adapted  to  our  nature  and  circumstances,  and 
free  from  all  the  defects  of  other  systems  of  morality; 
forbidding  nothing  which  is  innocent,  and  requiring 
nothing  which  is  not  reasonable  and  virtuous;  which 
reduces  all  duty  to  a  few  general  principles,  and  yet 


220 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


illustrates  the  application  of  these  principles  by  a 
multitude  of  particular  precepts,  addressed  to  persons 
in  eve;y  relation  of  life,  and  exemplifies  them  by 
setting  before  us  the  lives  of  holy  men,  who  are  por¬ 
trayed  according  to  truth  with  such  imperfections  as 
experience  teaches  us  belong  to  the  best  men ;  which 
delineates  the  character  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  founder 
of  Christianity,  with  such  a  perfection  of-moral  excel¬ 
lency,  by  simply  relating  his  words,  actions,  and  suf¬ 
ferings,  that  nothing  can  be  taken  from  it,  or  added 
to  it,  without  detracting  from  its  worth ;  and  finally, 
which  contains  the  true  sources  of  consolation  for 
every  species  of  human  suffering,  and  comfort  in 
death  itself : — whether  such  a  book  is  the  production 
of  vile  impostors,  and  those  impostors  uneducated 
fishermen.  Would  such  men  have  fallen  into  no 
palpable  blunders  in  theology  or  morality?  Could 
they  have  preserved  so  beautiful  a  harmony  and 
consistency  between  all  the  parts  ?  Could  they 
have  exhibited  such  a  character  as  that  of  Jesus 
Christ  ?  and  while  they  introduce  him  acting  and 
speaking  so  often,  and  in  circumstances  so  peculiar 
and  difficult,  never  ascribe  to  him  any  error  or 
weakness,  in  word  or  deed?  Would  impostors  have 
denounced  all  manner  of  falsehood  and  deceit,  as  is 
done  in  the  New  Testament?  Would  they  have  in¬ 
sisted  so  much  on  holiness,  even  in  the  thoughts  and 
purposes  of  the  heart  ?  Could  they  have  so  perfectly 
adapted  their  forgery  to  the  constitution  of  the  human 
mind  and  to  the  circumstances  of  men?  Is  it  proba¬ 
ble  that  they  would  have  possessed  the  wisdom  to 
avoid  all  the  prejudices  of  their  nation,  and  all 
connexion  with  existing  sects  and  civil  institutions? 
And  finally,  could  they  have  provided  so  effectually 
for  the  consolation  of  the  afflicted?  What,  man  now 
upon  earth  could  compose  even  the  discourses,  said 
by  the.  evangelists  to  have  been  spoken  by  Jesus 
Christ  ? 

If  any  man  can  bring  himself,  after  an  impartial 
examination  of  the  .Scriptures,  to  believe  that  they 
were  written  by  unprincipled  impostors,  then  he 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  22 1 

may  believe  that  an  untutored  savage  might  con¬ 
struct  a  ship  of  the  line;  that  a  child  might  have 
written  the  Iliad,  or  Paradise  Lost;  or  even  that 
the  starry  firmament  was  the  work  of  mere  creatures. 
No:  it  cannot  be  that  this  is  a  forgery.  No  man  or 
set  of  men  ever  had  sufficient  talents  and  knowledge 
to  forge  such  a  book  as  the  Bible.  It  evidently  trans¬ 
cends  all  human  effort.  It  has  upon  its  face  the  im¬ 
press  of  divinity.  It  shines  with  a  light,  which  by 
its  clearness  and  its  splendour,  shows  itself  to  be 
celestial.  It  possesses  the  energy  and  penetrating  in¬ 
fluence  which  bespeak  the  omnipotence  and  omni¬ 
science  of  its  author.  It  has  the  effect  of  enlighten¬ 
ing,  elevating,  purifying,  directing,  and  comforting 
all  those  who  cordially  receive  it.  Surely  then  it  is 
the  word  of  God,  and  we  hold  it  fast  as  the  best 
blessing  which  God  has  vouchsafed  to  man. 

0  precious  .'Gospel  !  Will  any  merciless  hand 
endeavour  to  tear  away  from  our  hearts  this  best, 
this  last,  and  sweetest  consolation  ?  Would  you 
darken  the  only  avenue  through  which  one  ray  of 
hope  can  enter?  Would  you  tear  from  the  aged 
and  infirm  poor  the  only  prop  on  which  their  souls 
can  repose  in  peace  ?  Would  you  deprive  the  dying 
of  their  only  source  of  consolation?  Would  you  rob 
the  world  of  its  richest  treasure?  Would  you  let 
loose  the  flood-gates  of  every  vice,  and  bring  back 
upon  the  earth  the  horrors  of  superstition  or  the 
atrocities  of  atheism?  Then  endeavour  to  subvert 
the  gospel;  throw  around  you  the  fire-brands  of 
infidelity;  laugh  at  religion,  and  make  a  mock  of 
futurity;  but  be  assured  that  for  all  these  things  God 
will  bring  you  into  judgment.  But  I  will  not  be¬ 
lieve  that  any  who  reflect  on  what  has  been  said,  in 
these  pages,  will  ever  cherish  a  thought  so  diaboli¬ 
cal.  I  will  persuade  myself  that  a  regard  for  the 
welfare  of  their  country,  if  no  higher  motive,  will 
induce  them  to  respect  the  Christian  religion.  And 
every  pious  heart  will  say,  rather  let  the  light 

OF  THE  SUN  BE  EXTINGUISHED  THAN  THE  PRECIOUS 
LIGHT  OF  THE  GOSPEL. 


19* 


222 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


CHAPTER  XIV. 


THE  SCRIPTURES  OF  THE  OLD  AND  NEW  TESTAMENT  WERE; WRITTEN  BY 
THE  INSPIRATION  OF  GOD  ;  AND  THIS  INSPIRATION,  HOWEVER  IT  MAY 
BE  DISTINGUISHED,  WAS  PLENARY  J  THAT  IS,  THE  WRITERS  WERE  UN¬ 
DER  AN  INFALLIBLE  GUIDANCE,  BOTH  AS  TO  IDEAS  AND  WORDS  :  AND 
YET  THE  ACQUIRED  KNOWLEDGE,  HABITS,  AND  PECULIAR  DISPOSITIONS 
OF  THE  WRITERS,  WERE  NOT  SUPERSEDED. 

*  ) 

Having  endeavoured  to  establish  the  authenticity 
of  the  Scriptures,  I  come  now  to  say  something  re¬ 
specting  the  inspiration  of  the  writers  of  the  several 
books.  These  two  subjects  are,  it  is  true,  involved 
in  eacli  other;  and  many  of  the  arguments  for  the 
former  are  conclusive  in  favour  of  the  latter;  but 
still  there  is  a  distinction  which  it  is  important  to 
observe.  A  book  may  be  authentic,  without  having 
the  least  claim  to  inspiration,  as  are  all  true  narra¬ 
tives  of  facts,  written  by  men  of  veracity  in  the  exer¬ 
cise  of  their  unassisted  powers.  The  gospel  history 
may  be  established  on  the  common  principles  of 
human  testimony,  in  the  same  manner  as  any  other 
history.  Indeed,  this  must  be  done,  in  the  order  of 
proof,  before  any  convincing  argument  can  be  formed 
in  favour  of  divine  revelation.  Accordingly,  all  ju¬ 
dicious  writers  on  the  Evidences  of  Christianity  first 
attempt  to  establish  the  facts  recorded  in.  the  Gospels, 
by  an  appeal  to  mere  human  testimony.  This  dis¬ 
tinction  is  so  clear,  and  practically  so  important,  that 
many  persons  believe  in  the  facts — miracles  as  well 
as  others — and  yet  have  no  conviction  that  the  his¬ 
tory  of  these  events  was  written  by  divine  inspira- 
•  tion.  This  is  understood  to  be  the  case  in  regard  to 
most  of  those  called  Unitarians.  Dr.  Priestley,  in 
his  “  Institutes  of  the  Christian  Religion,”  has  estab¬ 
lished  the  authenticity  of  the  facts  recorded  by  the 
evangelists  with  great  force  of  reasoning;  and  yet 
in  the  same  work,  he  utterly  denies  the  plenary  in 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


223 


spiration  of  these  writers;  but  alleges  that  they  were 
men  of  veracity,  and  that  their  testimony  should  be 
received,  just  as  we  receive  that  of  other  credible 
historians,  blit  without  ascribing  infallibility  to  them. 
The  same  opinions  have  been  maintained  by  many 
others.  The  authenticity  of  the  facts  is  sufficient  to 
demonstrate  that  the  Christian  religion  is  of  divine 
origin;  but  it  does  not  follow,  as  a  matter  of  course, 
that  the  historian  who  gives  an  account  of  the  facts 
on  which  it  rests  was  inspired.  This  is  a  distinct 
inquiry,  and  although  not  so  vitally  important  as  the 
former,  is  of  great  moment,  and  deserves  a  serious 
and  impartial  consideration. 

It  may  be  proper  also  in  this  place  to  distinguish  be¬ 
tween  inspiration  and  that  illumination  which  every 
true  Christian  must  receive,  and  which  is  the  founda¬ 
tion  of  that  saving  faith  which  is  produced  in  the 
mind  by  the  operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  dis¬ 
tinction  is,  that  the  object  of  inspiration  is  common¬ 
ly  to  reveal  some  new  truths,  or  more  clearly  to 
reveal  such  as  were  before  but  obscurely  revealed ; 
or  it  is  intended  to  direct  the  mind,  in  a  supernatural 
way,  to  write  and  speak  certain  things,  and  so  super¬ 
intends  or  strengthens  its  faculties,  that  it  is  enabled 
to  communicate,  with  unerring  certainty,  truths  be¬ 
fore  unknown;  or  to  form  ideas  and  adopt  expres¬ 
sions  so  sublime,  as  to  be  above  the  range  of  the 
natural  powers  of  the  person.  The  illumination 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  communicates  no  new  truths,  but 
enables  the  soul  spiritually  to  apprehend  truths,  al¬ 
ready  revealed.  Here  then  is  the  grand  distinction 
between  those  spiritual  influences  which  all  Chris¬ 
tians  enjoy,  and  enthusiasm  which  claims  something 
of  the  nature  of  inspiration.  The  sober  Christian 
can  appeal  to  the  word  of  God,  as  containing  all  the 
ideas  by  which  his  mind  is  affected,  in  its  highest 
elevations  of  joy  and  love;  but  the, enthusiast  departs 
from  the  written  word,  and  trusts  to  impulses,  im¬ 
pressions  on  the  imagination,  immediate  suggestions, 
dreams  or  supposed  visions.  If  these  impulses  or 
suggestions  were  from  the  Spirit  of  God,  they  would 


22  4 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


be  strictly  of  the  nature  of  inspiration.  And,  accord¬ 
ingly,  most  fanatics  believe  themselves  to  be  inspir¬ 
ed;  but  however  strong  their  persuasion,  we  are  not 
bound  to  believe  in  their  pretensions,  unless  they 
can  exhibit  those  external  proofs,  by  which  God  is 
pleased  to  attest  such  communications  as  he  makes 
to  men. 

There  is  also  a  difference  between  inspiration  and 
revelation.  All  revelations  are  not  made  by  a  sug¬ 
gestion  of  truth  to  the  mind  of  an  individual.  God 
often  spake  to  people  of  old  by  audible  voices,  and 
communicated  his  will  by  the  mission  of  angels. 
Many  persons  have  thus  received  divine  revelations, 
who  had  no  pretensions  to  inspiration.  All  the  peo¬ 
ple  of  Israel  who  stood  before  God  at  Mount  Sinai, 
heard  his  voice  uttering  the  ten  commandments,  and 
yet  no  one  would  say  that  all  these  were  inspired. 
So  also  when  Christ  was  upon  earth,  in  more  instan¬ 
ces  than  one,  a  voice  was  heard  declaring  that  he 
was  the  beloved  Son  of  God.  Indeed,  all  who  had 
the  opportunity  of  hearing  Christ’s  discourses  might 
be  said  to  receive  a  revelation  immediately  from  God; 
but  it  would  be  absurd  to  say  that  all  these  were 
inspired.  Dr.  Dick  is  of  opinion,  that  the  word  reve¬ 
lation  would  be  more  expressive,  as  being  more 
comprehensive,  than  suggestion ,  which  last  conveys 
the  idea  of  an  operation  on  the  mind;  whereas,  truth, 
in  many  cases,  was  made  known  in  other  ways.  But 
for  the  reason  stated  above,  it  would  not  do  to  substi¬ 
tute  the  word  revelation  iox  inspiration ;  inasmuch 
as  multitudes  received  revelations  who  had  no  claim 
to  inspiration.  And  when  inspiration  is  confined  to 
those  who  wrote  the  books  of  Scripture,  no  other 
word  would  so  clearly  express  the  idea. 

Inspiration  has  by  theologians  been  distinguished 
into  three  kinds;  that  of  superintendence ,  of  sugges¬ 
tion,  and  of  elevation.  The  first  of  these  takes  place, 
when  an  historian  is  influenced  by  the  Holy  Spirit  to 
write,  and  in  writing  is  so  directed  as  to  select  those 
facts  and  circumstances  which  will  answer  the  end 
proposed ;  and  so  assisted  and  strengthened  in  the 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  225 

narrative  of  events,  as  to  be  preserved  from  all  error 
and  mistake.  The  facts  need  not  be  revealed,  because 
they  may  be  well  known  to  the  writer  from  his  own 
observation,  and  may  be  deeply  impressed  on  his 
memory ;  but  no  man  can  avoid  inaccuracies  and 
mistakes  in  a  narrative  of  facts,  long  past.  If  it  is 
important  that  such  a  narrative  be  exempt  from  error, 
the  writer  must  be  inspired.  But  as  the  chief  object 
of  inspiration  is  to  communicate  truths  before  un¬ 
known,  the  inspiration  of  suggestion  is  requisite  in  all 
such  cases ;  as  when  the  prophets  were  inspired  to 
predict  the  revolutions  of  empires,  or  to  communicate 
a  message  from  God  to  a  whole  people,  or  to  an 
individual,  the  ideas  must  of  course  have  been  imme¬ 
diately  suggested  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  third  spe¬ 
cies  of  inspiration  takes  place,  when,  by  a  divine 
influence,  persons  are  enabled  to  bring  forth  produc¬ 
tions,  in  speaking  or  writing,  far  more  sublime  and 
excellent  than  they  could  have  attained  by  the  exer¬ 
cise  of  their  own  faculties.  Thus  women,  under  the 
inspiration  of  God,  have  instantly  uttered,  in  elevated 
strains  of  poetry,  discourses  in  praise  of  God,  which, 
by  their  unassisted  powers,  they  could  never  have 
produced.  In  these  compositions,  there  may  be  no 
revelation  of  truth;  nor  is  there  a  mere  superintend¬ 
ence  of  the  human  faculties,  as  in  the  first  case  was 
described;  but  the  powers  of  the  mind  are,  for  the 
occasion,  wonderfully  elevated  above  their  common 
level,  so  that  the  conceptions  are  more  vivid  and  sub¬ 
lime,  and  expressed  in  language  more  appropriate 
and  striking,  than  would  have  naturally  occurred  to 
them.  By  an  inspiration  of  this  sort  David  wrote 
the  Psalms,  and  Solomon  the  Proverbs,  and  the 
speakers,  in  the  bookmf  Job,  the  sublime  discourses 
which  are  there  recorded.  Many  things  of  this  kind 
are  also  found  in  the  writings  of  the  prophets. 

Here  another  question  of  some  perplexity  demands 
our  attention.  It  is,  whether  the  words  of  Scripture, 
as  well  as  the  ideas,  were  given  by  inspiration.  On 
the  one  hand  it  is  alleged,  that  there  is  no  necessity 
for  supposing  that  the  words  used  in  communicating 


226 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


revealed  truth  should  be  suggested  by  the  Holy 
Spirit;  and  that  the  fact  proves  that  no  such  inspira¬ 
tion  existed,  because  the  style  of  each  of  the  writers 
is  peculiar,  and  accords  precisely  with  his  education, 
disposition,  and  turn  of  mind.  But  on  the  other 
hand  it  is  argued,  that 'unless  the  words  were  inspir¬ 
ed  as  well  as  the  ideas,  we  cannot  be  certain  that 
the  writer  has,  in  any  case,  communicated  accurate¬ 
ly  the  mind  of  the  Spirit;  for  men  are  liable  to  mis¬ 
take  in  the  selection  of  appropriate  words,  as  much 
as  in  any  thing  else;  and  as  men  often  fail  in  con¬ 
veying  their  own  ideas  in  language  which  correctly 
expresses  their  meaning,  they  might  make  similar 
mistakes  in  the  use  of  language  to  express  ideas  re¬ 
ceived  by  inspiration,  if  in  this  matter  they  were  left 
ter  the  guidance  of  their  own  minds.  It  has  also  been 
plausibly  urged  in  favour  of  inspiration  extending  to 
the  words,  that  we  can  scarcely  conceive  of  a  revela¬ 
tion  of  truths  to  the  mind,  without  supposing  that 
they  were  clothed  in  language.  We  cannot  even 
think  distinctly,  much  less  reason  conclusively,  on 
any  subject,  without  the  intervention  of  words. 

It  is  probable,  that  in  this  controversy  as  in  many 
others,  both  parties  are  right ;  or  rather,  that  the 
truth  will  be  fully  possessed  by  adopting  the  views 
entertained  on  both  sides,  and  endeavouring  to  re¬ 
concile  them.  The  same  principles  which  apply  to 
the  ideas  may,  without  any  alteration,  be  applied  to 
the  words.  When  the  truths  revealed  were  before 
unknown  to  the  inspired  person;  and  especially — as 
seems  often  to  have  been  the  case  with  the  prophets 
— when  they  did  not  fully  comprehend  the  import 
of  what  was  revealed,  it  is  necessary  to  suppose  that 
the  words,  as  well  as  ideas,  were  immediately  sug¬ 
gested  by  the  Holy-  Spirit.  This  was  remarkably 
the  case,  when  the  apostles  and  others  received  the 
gift  of  tongues;  which  was  nothing  else  but  the  in¬ 
spiration  of  words,  as  they  were  needed,  for  the  com¬ 
munication  of  the  truths  of  the  gospel. 

But  as  in  the  narration  of  swell-known  facts,  the 
writer  did  not  need  a  continual  suggestion  of  every 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


227 


idea,  but  only  to  be  so  superintended,  as  to  be  pre¬ 
served  from  error;  so  in  the  use  of  language  in  re¬ 
cording  such  familiar  things,  there  existed  no  neces¬ 
sity  that  every  word  should  be  inspired;  but  there 
was  the  same  need  of  a  directing  and  superintending 
influence,  as  in  regard  to  the  things  themselves. 
Here,  then,  we  see  that  the  language  of  the  sacred 
writers  might  be  preserved  from  impropriety  and 
inaccuracy,  and  yet  all  the  characteristics  of  style 
peculiar  to  each  writer  be  retained.  Just  as  if  a 
master  should  so  guide  the  hand  of  a  child  in  writing, 
that  the  pen  should  be  actually  moved  by  the  pupil, 
but  governed  and  directed  by  the  master,  so  as  not 
to  transgress  the  limits  prescribed.  Or  this  superin¬ 
tendence,  both  as  to  ideas  and  words,  may  be  illus¬ 
trated  by  the  case  of  a  father  conducting  a  child  along 
a  narrow  path.  The  child  walks  by  its  own  activity, 
and  takes  steps  according  to  its  ability;  but  the  father 
preserves  it  from  falling,  and  keeps  it  in  the  straight 
path.  Just  so  it  is  with  men  when  under  the  super¬ 
intending  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Their  own 
powers  of  understanding,  memory  and  invention  are 
not  superseded,  but  only  directed,  and  preserved  from 
inaccuracy  and  error;  but  the  man  pursues  his  own 
peculiar  method  of  thinking,  reasoning,  and  expres¬ 
sion.  He  speaks  or  writes  in  the  language  which  he 
has  learned,  and  uses  that  idiom  and  style  which 
have  become  habitual;  so  that  inspired  men  will, 
according  to  this  theory,  retain  their  peculiarity  of 
style  and  expression  just  as  fully,  as  if  they  were 
writing  or  speaking  without  inspiration. 

Some  object  to  this  theory  of  superintendence,  un¬ 
der  the  impression  that  it  is  less  perfect,  than  if  every 
thing  were  inspired  by  direct  suggestion  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  But  there  is  really  no  foundation  for  this 
objection.  It  certainly  is  a  matter  of  no  consequence 
how  our  knowledge  is  obtained,  if  it  is  only  rendered 
infallibly  certain.  There  are  many  things  concern¬ 
ing  which  we  could  not  acquire  a  greater  degree  of 
assurance  than  we  already  possess,  by  inspiration  of 
any  kind :  and  such  knowledge  acquired  by  the  exer- 


228  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

cise  of  reason  or  intuition,  is  not  the  less  valuable 
because  it  has  been  obtained  in  a  natural  way.  In¬ 
deed,  these  natural  faculties,  by  which  we  are  so 
constituted  as  to  be  capable  of  certain  knowledge  of 
the  first  principles  of  truth,  are  the  gift  of  God  as 
much  as  any  inspiration  can  be:'  and  the  clear  intui¬ 
tive  knowledge  which  we  possess  of  certain  truths, 
may  be  considered  as  a  sort  of  permanent  inspiration. 
Suppose  a  man  by  a  constant  plenary  inspiration  to 
be  made  absolutely  sure  of  the  truth  of  certain  pro 
positions,  so  that  he  could  not  entertain  any  doubt 
respecting  them,  in  what  respect  would  there  be  any 
difference  between  this  and  the  intuitive  perception 
of  self-evident  principles,  which  every  rational  man 
by  nature  possesses?  There  would  then  be  nothing 
gained  by  the  inspiration  of  direct  suggestion,  in 
regard  to  our  knowledge  of  those  things  of  which  we 
already  possess  intuitive  certainty.  It  is  also  evident, 
that  in  relation  to  all  our  knowledge  acquired  by 
experience  or  testimony,  we  only  need  such  an  influ¬ 
ence  as  will  enable  us  to  communicate  what  oughc 
to  be  recorded  for  the  benefit  of  the  church,  and  to 
do  this  without  error,  either  as  to  matter  or  manner 
Some,  who  do  not  deny  the  inspiration  of  the 
sacred  writers,  in  general,  have  thought  it  necessary 
to  make  concessions  on  this  subject  which  are  not 
called  for  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  and  have  thus 
involved  the  cause  which  they  defend  in  real  difficul¬ 
ties.  They  have  granted  that,  while,  in  all  matters 
of  real  importance,  the  penmen  of  the  Scriptures 
were  guided  by  a  plenary  inspiration,  they  were  left 
to  their  own  unassisted  powers  in  trivial  matters,  and 
the  relation  of  unimportant  circumstances;  and  in 
such  matters  have,  therefore,  fallen  into  mistakes  in 
regard  to  trivial  circumstances.  No  evil  or  inconve¬ 
nience  would  result  from  this  hypothesis,  if  the  line 
could  be  definitely  drawn  between  the  parts  of  the 
book  written  by  inspiration  and  those  in  which  the 
writers  were  left  to  themselves.  But  as  no  human 
wisdom  is  sufficient  to  draw  this  line,  the  effect  of 
this  opinion  is  to  introduce  uncertainty  and  doubt  in 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


229 


a  matter  concerning  which  assurance  is  of  the  utmost 
importance.  And  it  is  in  itself  an  improbable  suppo¬ 
sition,  that  the  Spirit  of  God  should  infallibly  guide 
a  writer  in  some  parts  of  his  discourse,  and  forsake 
him  in  other  parts.  If  we  find  a  witness  mistaken 
in  some  particulars,  it  weakens  our  confidence  in  his 
general  testimony.  And  could  it  be  shown  that  the 
evangelists  had  fallen  into  palpable  mistakes  in  facts 
of  minor  importance,  it  would  be  impossible  to  de¬ 
monstrate  that  they  wrote  any  thing  by  inspiration. 

The  case  of  Paul  is  often  adduced  to  prove  that  a 
writer  who,  for  the  most  part,  was  inspired,  may  in 
particular  cases  be  left  to  follow  his  own  opinions  A 
If  the  meaning  here  ascribed  to  this  apostle,  and 
which  is  perhaps  the  most  obvious,  should  be  admit¬ 
ted,  it  would  not  authorize  the  opinion  which  we  are 
now  opposing.  It  would  only  follow  that,  in  these 
few  excepted  cases,  Paul  was  not  inspired;  which 
would  leave  us  to  enjoy  full  confidence  in  what  he 
says  in  all  other  cases,  as  being  spoken  by  divine 
inspiration.  But  it  may  well  be  doubted  whether 
this  was  the  true  meaning  of  the  apostle.  It  is  much 
more  probable,  that  all  he  intended  to  teach  was, 
that  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  had  delivered  no  opinion 
on  the  point  which  he  was  treating;  but  that  he,  by 
the  aid  of  the  Spirit  which  was  in  him,  expressed  an 
opinion  which  he  evidently  intended  should  be  autho¬ 
ritative.  And  he  plainly  intimates  that  he  spoke  by 
inspiration,  when  he  says,  “And  I  think  also  that  I 
have  the  Spirit  of  God.”  The  import  of  this  decla¬ 
ration,  according  to  the  usage  of  the  New  Testament, 
is,  that  Paul  was  persuaded  that  he  was  inspired  in 
uttering  the  sentiments  which  he  did.  The  words 
“  I  think,”  should  not  be  interpreted  as  indicating 
any  doubt  or  uncertainty,  for  that  is  not  at  all  the 
meaning  of  the  original;  but  as  being  the  expression 
of  the  conviction  of  his  own  mind.  There  is,  there¬ 
fore,  no  need  to  suppose  that  Paul  intended  to  inti¬ 
mate  that  he  wrote  any  thing  without  the  aid  of  di¬ 
vine  inspiration.  It  would  be  strange  indeed,  if  he, 

*  See  1  Cor.  vii.  12 — 40. 

20 


230  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

who  was  inspired  to  all  other  purposes,  had  been  left 
to  himself  in  this  one  instance,  as  this  is  not  to  be 
reckoned  among  the  least  important  matters  which 
have  fallen  from  his  pen. 

The  true  definition  of  inspiration,  then,  is,  such  a 

DIVINE  INFLUENCE  UPON  THE  MINDS  OF  THE  SACRED 
WRITERS  AS  RENDERED  THEM  EXEMPT  FROM  ERROR, 
BOTH  IN  REGARD  TO  THE  IDEAS  AND  WORDS. 

This  is  properly  called  plenary  inspiration.  No¬ 
thing  can  be  conceived  more  satisfactory.  Certainty, 
infallible  certainty,  is  the  utmost  that  can  be  desired 
in  any  narrative;  and  if  we  have  this  in  the  sacred 
Scriptures,  there  is  nothing  more  to  be  wished  in 
regard  to  this  matter. 

That  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament  were 
appealed  to,  and  constantly  spoken  of  as  inspired, 
and  free  from  error,  is  capable  of  the  clearest  proof. 
Christ  said  to  the  Jews,  “  Search  the  Scriptures,  for 
in  them  ye  think  ye  have  eternal  life,  and  they  are 
they  which  testify  of  me.”  “  For  had  ye  believed 
Moses,  ye  would  have  believed  me,  for  he  wrote  of 
me.”  On  another  occasion,  he  said,  “  Ye  do  err,  not 
knowing  the  Scriptures,”  where  it  is  evidently  im¬ 
plied  that  the  Scriptures  are  an  unerring  rule.  In 
the  same  chapter  it  is  recorded,  that  Jesus  confounded 
the  Pharisees  by  asking  them  how  David  could  in 
spirit  call  Christ  Lord,  when  he  was  his  son. 
Again,  Christ  after  his  resurrection  expresses  this 
sentiment  in  the  strongest  terms :  “  These  are  the 
words  which  I  spake  unto  you,  while  I  was  yet  with 
you;  That  all  things  must  be  fulfilled,  which 
are  written  in  the  law  of  Moses,  and  in  the  Prophets, 
and  in  the  Psalms,  concerning  me.  Then  opened  he 
their  understandings,  that  they  should  understand  the 
Scriptures,  and  said  unto  them,  Thus  it  is  written, 
and  thus  it  behoved  Christ  to  suffer  and  to  rise  from 
the  dead,  on  the  third  day.”  In  the  preceding  part 
of  the  same  discourse,  this  idea  is  also  clearly  exhibit¬ 
ed:  “  Then  he  said  unto  them,  0  fools,  and  slow  of 
heart  to  believe  all  that  the  prophets  have  spoken; 
ought  not  Christ  to  have  suffered  these  things,  and 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


231 


to  enter  into  his  glory  ?  And  beginning  at  Moses 
and  all  the  prophets,  he  expounded  unto  them  in  all 
the  Scriptures  the  things  concerning  himself.  And 
they  said  one  to  another,  Did  not  our  hearts  burn 
within  us  while  he  talked  with  us  by  the  way,  and 
while  he  opened  to  us  the  Scriptures ?”  So  also  in 
the  garden  of  Gethsemane,  our  Lord  addressing  Peter 
said,  “  Thinkest  thou  that  I  cannot  now  pray  to  my 
Father,  and  he  shall  presently  give  me  more  than 
twelve  legions  of  angels?  But  how  then  shall  the 
Scriptures  be  fulfilled,  that  thus  it  must  be?”  The 
same  infallible  authority  is  ascribed  to  the  Old  Testa¬ 
ment  by  Christ,  in  his  dispute  with  the  Jews,  recorded 
in  the  tenth  chapter  of  John.  “Jesus  answered  them, 
Is  it  not  written  in  your  law,  I  said,  ye  are  gods?  If 
he  called  them  gods  to  whom  the  word  of  God  came, 

and  THE  SCRIPTURES  CANNOT  BE  BROKEN,”  &C.  We 

have,  besides,  many  passages,  in  which  the  evangel¬ 
ists  refer  to  the  Holy  Scriptures  as  an  infallible  stand¬ 
ard  of  truth.  “  But  though  he  had  done  so  many 
miracles  before  them,  yet  they  believed  not  on  him, 
that  the  saying  of  Esaias  the  prophet  might  be  fulfil¬ 
led  which  he  spake — Lord,  who  hath  believed  our 
report,  and  to  whom  is  the  arm  of  the  Lord  reveal¬ 
ed  ?”  “  Therefore,  they  could  not  believe,  because 

that  Esaias  saith  again — He  hath  blinded  their  eyes,” 
&c.  “  For  these  things  were  done  that  the  Scripture 

should  be  fulfilled,  A  bone  of  him  shall  not  be  bro¬ 
ken.  And  again,  another  scripture  saith,  They  shall 
look  on  him  whom  they  have  pierced.” 

The  apostles  are  not  less  explicit  than  Christ  and 
the  evangelists,,  in  testifying  to  the  inspiration  of  the 
Scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament.  Paul  in  his  second 
epistle  to  Timothy  put  him  in  mind,  that  “  from  a 
child  he  had  known  the  holy  Scriptures,  which  were 
able  to  make  him  wise  unto  salvation,  through  faith 
which  is  in  Christ  Jesus;”  and  then  adds,  “all  Scrip¬ 
ture  is  given  by  inspiration^ of  God,  and  is  profitable 
for  doctrine,  for  reproof,  for  correction,  for  instruc¬ 
tion  in  righteousness ;  that  the  man  of  God  may  be 
perfect,  thoroughly  furnished  unto  all  good  works.” 


232  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

The  Scriptures,  which  Timothy  knew  from  his  child¬ 
hood,  must  have  been  the  books  of  the  Old  Testa¬ 
ment,  for  at  that  time  no  others  had  been  written. 
But  when  Paul  goes  on  to  declare,  that  “  all  Scrip¬ 
ture  was  given  by  inspiration  of  God,”  he  might 
have  included  under  this  general  expression,  all  the 
books  of  the  New  Testament  which  had  been  pub¬ 
lished  before  his  second  imprisonment  at  Rome;  and 
this  would  probably  comprehend  the  first  three  Gos¬ 
pels,  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  all  his  own  epistles; 
for  this  seems  to  have  been  the  last  of  Paul’s  writings; 
as  he  says  in  it,  “I  am  now  ready  to  be  offered,  and 
the  time  of  my  departure  is  at  hand.”  That  the 
writings  of  Paul  were  by  the  Church  reckoned  among 
the  sacred  Scriptures,  we  learn  from  the  second  epis¬ 
tle  of  Peter,  which  was  probably  written  about  this 
time  or  a  little  before.  His  words  are  remarkable,  as 
containing  the  only  clear  testimony  on  record  of  one 
apostle  to  the  writings  of  another.  “  Account,”  says  he, 
“  that  the  long-suffering  of  our  Lord  is  salvation,  even 
as  our  beloved  brother  Paul  also,  according  to  the 
wisdom  given  unto  him,  hath  written  unto  you.  As 
also  in  all  his  epistles,  speaking  in  them  of  these 
things;  in  which  are  some  things  hard  to  be  under¬ 
stood;  which  they  that  are  unlearned  and  unstable 
pervert,  as  they  do  also  the  other  Scriptures,  to  their 
own  destruction.”  Hence  it  would  appear,  that 
Paul’s  epistles  were  now  well  known,  and  were 
reckoned  among  the  other  Scriptures,  by  the  apostle 
Peter.  Certainly  then  Paul  himself  might  have  in¬ 
cluded  them,  as  well  as  the  other  published  books  of 
the  New  Testament,  under  the  phrase  “  all  Scrip¬ 
ture;”  and  if  so,  this  passage  will  contain  a  strong 
testimony  to  the  inspiration  of  the  whole  of  the  Old 
Testament,  and  a  large  part  of  the  New  Testament. 
And  admitting  the  facts  of  Paul’s  miraculous  conver¬ 
sion,  divine  mission  as  an  apostle,  and  endowment 
with  the  gift  of  tongues,  of  healing,  of  prophecy,  &c., 
we  cannot  deny  that  he  is  a  witness,  in  this  case,  on 
whom  we  may  repose  the  most  perfect  confidence. 

The  apostle  Peter  has  also  given  the  most  unequi- 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  233 

vocal  testimony  to  the  inspiration  of  the  Old  Testa¬ 
ment  prophets.  He  had  been  speaking  concerning 
the  wonderful  scene  of  which  he  was  a  witness  on 
the  mount  of  transfiguration,  whereupon  he  goes  on 
to  say:  “We  have  a  more  sure  word  of  prophecy 
whereunto  ye  do  well  that  ye  take  heed,  as  unto  a 
light  that  shineth  in  a  dark  place,  until  the  day  dawn 
and  the  day-star  arise  in  your  hearts;  knowing  this 
first,  that  no  prophecy  of  Scripture  is  of  any  private 
interpretation.  For  the  prophecy  came  not  in  old 
time  by  the  will  of  man ;  but  holy  men  of  God  spake 
as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost.”  There  is 
another  testimony  of  this  apostle  in  his  first  epistle; 
in  which  he  clearly  speaks  of  the  inspiration  of  the 
prophets.  “  Of  which  salvation  the  prophets  have 
inquired,  and  searched  diligently,  who  prophesied  of 
the  grace  that  should  come  unto  you;' searching  what 
or  what  manner  of  time  the  Spirit  of  Christ  which 
was  in  them  did  signify,  when  it  certified  beforehand 
the  sufferings  of  Christ  and  the  glory  that  should 
follow.  Unto  whom  it  was  revealed,  that  not  unto 
themselves,  but  unto  us,  they  did  minister  the  things 
which  are  now  reported  unto  you,  by  them  that  have 
preached  the  gospel  unto  you,  with  the  Holy  Ghost 
sent  down  from  heaven.” 

That  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament  were 
continually  recognized  by  the  apostles  as  given  by 
inspiration  of  God,  is  so  evident  from  every  mention 
of  them,  that  it  may  seem  to  be  a  waste  of  time  to 
adduce  the  testimonies ;  but  the  subject  is  exceed¬ 
ingly  important,  and  we  cannot  too  frequently  have 
these  evidences  set  before  our  eyes. 

In  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  there  are  many 
clear  testimonies,  some  of  which  I  will  bring  for¬ 
ward.  In  the  very  first  sentence  it  is  said,  “  God, 
who  at  sundry  times  and  in  divers  manners  spake  in 
time  past  unto  the  fathers  by  the  prophets,  hath  in 
these  last  days  spoken  unto  us  by  his  Son.”  What¬ 
ever  is  spoken  by  the  prophets  is  represented  through¬ 
out  this  book  as  spoken  by  God  himself.  Thus  in 
the  same  chapter  it  is  declared.  “  And  when  he  bring- 

20* 


234 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


eth  the  first-begotten  into  the  world,  he  saith,  And 
let  all  the  angels  of  God  worship  him.  And  of  the 
angels,  he  saith,  Who  maketh  his  angels  spirits. 
But  to  the  Son,  he  saith,  Thy  throne,  0  God,  is  for 
ever  and  ever.”  Now  all  these  passages,  where 
God  is  said  to  speak,  are  quotations  from  the  Psalms. 
Certainly  then  we  may  conclude,  that  whatever  is 
spoken  in  this  book  of  Psalms  is  from  the  inspiration 
of  God.  The  same  is  the  fact,  in  the  next  chapter, 
where  a  large  part  of  the  eighth  Psalm  is  quoted  and 
applied  to  Christ.  So  also  the  Captain  of  our  salvation 
is  represented  as  saying  certain  things,  which  are 
found  written  in  the  Old  Testament :  “  Saying,  I  will 
declare  thy  name  unto  my  brethren:” — “  And  again,  Ij 
will  put  my  trust  in  him.”  In  the  third  chapter  of 
this  epistle  we  have  a  quotation  from  the  Psalms  in. 
the  following  remarkable  words,  “Wherefore,  as  the 
Holy  Ghost  saith,  To-day  if  ye  will  hear  his  voice 
harden  not  your  hearts.”  And  in  the  fourth  chapter 
the  same  style  is  used  as  before.  “For  he  spake  in 
a  certain  place  of  the  seventh  day  in  this  wise,  And 
God  did  rest  the  seventh  day  from  all  his  works.” 
And  in  the  fifth:  “But  he  said  unto  him,  Thou  art 
my  Son ;  to-day  have  I  begotten  thee.  As  he  saith 
also  in  another  place,  Thou  art  a  priest  for  ever  after 
the  order  of  Melchisedec.”  And  God  is  represented 
as  the  speaker,  not  only  in  what  is  written  in  the 
Psalms,  but  in  the  prophets  also.  In  the  eighth 
chapter  we  have  a  long  quotation  from  Jeremiah, 
which  is  declared  to  be  the  word  of  the  Lord.  “Be¬ 
hold  the  days  come,  saith  the  Lord,”  &c.  One  more 
testimony  from  this  book  shall  suffice.  In  the  tenth 
chapter,  it  is  said,  “Wherefore  the  Holy  Ghost  also 
is  a  witness  unto  us ;  for  after  that  he  had  said  be¬ 
fore,  This  is  the  covenant  that  I  will  make  with 
them  after  those  days,  saith  the  Lord,”  &c. 

In  short,  as  the  writers  of  the  Old  Testament  declar¬ 
ed  themselves  to  speak  what  they  received  from  the 
Lord,  so  the  whole  of  the  Scriptures  are  continually 
referred  to,  and  recognized  as  given  by  inspiration ; 
insomuch  that  it  would  be  difficult  to  find  a  single 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  235 

passage,  in  which  these  Scriptures  are  mentioned, 
where  this  idea  is  not  expressed  or  clearly  implied. 
And  it  will  be  shown  hereafter,  that  the  writers  of 
the  New  Testament  claim  inspiration  for  themselves. 


CHAPTER,  XV. 

THE  INSPIRATION  OF  THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT, 

If,  as  has  been  shown,  the  Old  Testament  was  writ¬ 
ten  by  inspiration,  and  if  the  New  Testament  con¬ 
tains  a  revelation  from  God  not  less  important,  and 
is  in  fact  the  completion  of  the  Old,  can  we  believe 
that  while  prophets  were  inspired  to  write  the  former, 
the  latter  was  left  to  be  marred  and  obscured  by  the 
weaknesses  of  uninspired  men  ? 

To  accomplish  the  purpose  intended  by  revelation, 
it  seems  necessary  that  the  writers  who  communi¬ 
cate  it  to  posterity  should  be  guided  by  inspiration. 
The  end  of  revelation  is  to  convey  to  men  a  certain 
knowledge  of  truth,  to  guide  their  faith  and  practice. 
But  if  the  book  which  contains  such  a  revelation  is 
composed  by  erring,  fallible  men,  we  never  can  be 
sure,  in  any  particular  case,  that  we  are  in  posses¬ 
sion  of  the  truth  revealed.  The  men  may  be  honest 
and.  faithful,  but  we  know  that  all  men  are  liable  to 
errors  and  mistakes;  and  all  men  are  more  or  less 
under  the  influence  of  prejudices  and  prepossessions. 
It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  the  purpose  of  giving  a 
revelation  would  be  in  a  great  measure  defeated, 
unless  inspired  men  were  employed  to  make  the 
record  by  which  it  is  to  be  transmitted  to  the  various 
nations  of  the  earth  and  to  posterity. 

Again,  when  we  carefully  consider  the  subject 
matter  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  we  can¬ 
not  repose  implicit  confidence  in  what  is  taught,  un- 


236  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

less  we  have  evidence  that  the  pens  of  the  writers 
were  under  the  guidance  of  inspiration.  To  record 
the  discourses  which  a  man  hears,  and  transactions 
which  he  sees,  seems,  at  first  sight,  to  require  nothing 
more  than  veracity,  and  integrity  in  the  historian. 
This  might  to  a  certain  extent  be  admitted,  if  the 
witness  instantly  noted  down  what  he  heard  or  saw ; 
but  who  can  believe  that  after  the  lapse  of  eight, 
fifteen,  or  fifty  years,  the  evangelists  would  be  able 
to  record  with  perfect  accuracy,  long  discourses  of 
their  Master,  and  to  relate  correctly  all  the  circum¬ 
stances  of  the  miracles  of  which  they  have  given  an 
account  ?  It  may  be  said,  indeed,  that  they  could 
give  substantially  the  facts  of  which  they  were  wit¬ 
nesses;  but  this  is  far  from  being  satisfactory.  Such 
a  record  would  lose  a  portion  of  that  reverence  which 
it  ought  to  possess,  in  order  to  give  it  a  commanding 
authority  over  the  conscience,  and  make  it  a  solid 
foundation  for  unshaken  confidence.  In  regard  to 
the  mysterious  and  sublime  doctrines  which  the 
apostles  teach  in  their  epistles,  if  once  we  admit  the 
idea  that  they  were  fallible  men,  we  shall  continually 
be  liable  to  doubt  ;  we  shall  be  afraid  they  have  mis¬ 
apprehended,  or  forgotten  what  they  had  heard;  or, 
that,  under  the  bias  of  prejudice  or  inclination,  they 
may  have  been  led  insensibly  to  give  a  distorted 
view  of  the  truths  which  they  inculcate. 

But  we  are  not  left  to  conclude  from  the  necessity 
of  the  case  merely,  that  the  writers  of  the  New  Tes¬ 
tament  were  inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  We  have 
clear  and  abundant  proof  that  our  blessed  Lord 
promised  infallible  guidance  to  his  disciples  whom 
he  chose  to  be  his  witnesses  to  the  world;  and  to 
whom  he  committed  the  propagation  of  his  religion 
through  all  nations  and  all  ages.  “  And  I  will  pray 
the  Father,  and  he  shall  give  you  another  Comforter, 
that  he  may  abide  with  you  for  ever;  even  the  Spirit 
of  truth,  whom  the  world  cannot  receive,  because  it 
seeth  him  not,  neither  knoweth  him;  but  ye  know 
him,  for  he  dwelleth  with  you  and  shall  be  in  you.” 
And  that  the  Holy  Spirit  here  promised  was  to  guide 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


237 


the  apostles  in  delivering  their  testimony,  may  be  in¬ 
ferred  from  what  is  said  in  the  fifteenth  chapter  of 
John :  “  But  when  the  Comforter  is  come,  whom  I 
will  send  unto  you  from  the  Father,  even  the  Spirit 
of  truth,  which  proceed eth  from  the  Father,  he  shall 
testify  of  me.  And  ye  shall  bear  witness,  because 
ye  have  been  with  me  from  the  beginning.”  The 
promise  of  plenary  inspiration  is,  however,  more  ex¬ 
plicitly  given  in  the  sixteenth  chapter.  “  Howbeit, 
when  he,  the  Spirit  of  truth,  is  come,  he  will  guide 
you  into  all  truth;  for  he  shall  not  speak  of  him¬ 
self  ;  but  whatsoever  he  shall  hear,  that  shall  he 
speak;  and  he  will  show  you  things  to  come.  He  shall 
glorify  me ;  for  he  shall  receive  of  mine,  and  shall 
show  it  unto  you.  All  things  that  the  Father  hath 
are  mine ;  therefore  said  I  that  he  shall  take  of  mine, 
and  shall  show  it  unto  you.”  Christ  also  promised 
the  inspiration  of  immediate  suggestion  to  his  disci¬ 
ples,  when  called  to  answer  before  kings  and  rulers, 
and  commanded  them  not  to  premeditate  what  they 
should  say,  for  it  would  be  given  to  them  at  the  mo¬ 
ment  what  they  ought  to  say.  “  For,”  said  he,  "it  is 
not  you  that  speak,  but  the  Holy  Ghost  who  speak- 
eth  in  you.”  Now  \ye  may  argue  with  irresistible 
force,  that  if  plenary  inspiration  was  granted  to  the 
apostles  to  enable  them  to  make  a  proper  defence 
when  arraigned  at  a  human  tribunal,  surely  they 
would  not  be  abandoned  to  their  own  weakness 
when  preparing  a  record  of  Christ’s  words  and  ac¬ 
tions,  which  was  through  all  ages  to  be  the  guide  of 
his  Church.  If  the  apostles  were  ever  inspired,  we 
may  be  sure  that  it  was  when  directed  to  finish  and 
record  the  testimony  of  God.  The  very  idea  that 
every  book  of  the  Old  Testament  was  given  by  in¬ 
spiration,  but  that  the  whole  of  the  New  was  com¬ 
posed  without  this  aid,  is  revolting  to  the  reason  of 
man.  And  this  will  appear  the  more  unreasonable, 
when  we  consider,  that  the  light  of  the  new  dispen¬ 
sation  is  seven-fold  clearer  than  that  of  the  old.  The 
very  forerunner  of  Christ  was  superior  to  all  the 
prophets  that  preceded  him.  but  the  least  in  the  king- 


238 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


dom  of  heaven  was  greater  than  he.  Then  certain¬ 
ly,  if  all  the  prophets  only  spoke  as  they  were  moved 
by  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  apostles  who  were  the  chosen 
witnesses  of  Christ  and  chief  officers  of  his  kingdom, 
were  not  left  without  this  infallible  guidance,  when 
engaged  in  performing  the  most  important  part  of 
the  responsible  duty  assigned  them;  when  executing 
that  part  of  their  commission  which  was  most  effec¬ 
tual  in  extending  and  perpetuating  his  spiritual  king¬ 
dom.  Accordingly,  the  apostles  claim  to  be  inspired 
men,  and  speak  with  an  authority  which  would  be 
arrogant,  if  they  had  not  written  under  an  infallible 
guidance.  They  do  not  merely  express  their  own 
private  opinions,  and  endeavour  to  support  them  by 
argument;  they  speak  as  men  assured  of  the  truth  of 
what  they  deliver,  and  decide  with  authority  and 
without  hesitation,  questions,  which  none  but  men 
inspired  by  the  Holy  Spirit  could  undertake  thus* 
positively  to  determine,  without  exposing  themselves 
to  the  charge  of  dogmatism  and  self-sufficiency. 

Besides,  some  parts  of  the  New  Testament,  like 
much  of  the  Old,  are  prophetic,  and  if  true,  could  be 
written  in  no  other  way  than  by  inspiration.  The 
Apocalypse  or  Revelation  given  to  John,  is  either  a 
mere  enthusiastic  fable,  or  it  was  written  by  inspira¬ 
tion  ;  and  such  is  the  majesty  of  the  ideas  here  pre¬ 
sented,  and  the  awful  sublimity  of  the  style,  that 
even  Dr.  Priestley  was  constrained  to  acknowledge 
that  it  bore  on  its  face  marks  of  a  superhuman  origin. 
If  we  had  time  to  compare  the  prophetic  representa¬ 
tions  of  this  singular  book  with  authentic  history, 
there  would  arise  an  evidence  of  its  inspiration  which 
could  not  be  easily  contradicted.  Such  men  as  Sir 
Isaac  Newton,  Dr.  S.  Clarke,  Bishop  Hurd,  Bishop 
Newton,  and  a  multitude  of  others,  have  seen  in  this 
book  the  most  convincing  proof  of  divine  inspiration. 
The  same  may  be  said  of  all  the  prophecies  of  the 
Old  and  New  Testament.  If  there  is  any  truth 
whatever  in  them,  they  must  be  inspired;  for  none 
but  inspired  men  can  foretell  future  contingent  events. 
Indeed,  in  all  the  cases  where  Moses  and  others 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  239 

declare  that  God  spoke  to  them,  and  communicated 
instructions  or  laws,  they  must  be  considered  as 
divinely  directed,  unless  we  deny  their  veracity.  But 
we  are  now  reasoning  on  the  hypothesis,  that  the 
books  are  authentic  and  written  by  men  of  truth  and 
honesty. 

The  style  of  the  evangelists  has  often  been  adduced 
as  an  evidence  of  their  inspiration:  not  that  they 
write  with  an  elegance  and  sublimity  which  cannot 
be  imitated ;  but  because  they  write  as  persons  divest¬ 
ed  of  the  feelings  which  commonly  belong  to  men. 
They  write  with  an  unaffected  simplicity,  and  with 
an  impartial,  dispassionate  regard  to  truth,  which 
has  no  parallel,  and  has  never  been  successfully  imi¬ 
tated.  How  could  illiterate  men  produce  such  works 
as  the  gospels  without  inspiration  ?  Select  a  thou¬ 
sand  sensible  men,  but  unaccustomed  to  composition, 
and  set  them  to  write  a  simple  history  of  the  most 
remarkable  transactions  with  which  they  have  been 
conversant,  and  there  will  not  be  in  any  one  of  them 
an  approximation  to  the  characteristic  manner  of  the 
evangelists.  Others,  and  men  possessed  of  more 
learning  than  the  apostles,  have  undertaken,  without 
inspiration,  to  write  gospels,  as  if  composed  by  some 
one  or  other  of  those  holy  men;  but  you  cannot 
place  the  evidence  of  the  inspiration  of  the  genuine 
gospels  in  a  stronger  light  than  by  contrasting  them 
with  any  or  all  the  apocryphal  writings  under  the 
names  of  the  apostles. 

But  we  are  in  danger  here  of  repeating  what  has 
already  been  said  under  the  head  of  the  internal 
Evidences  of  Christianity.  The  truth  is,  that  the 
whole  of  the  arguments  from  this  source,  for  divine 
revelation,  are  directly  in  point  to  prove  the  doctrine 
of  inspiration ;  and  therefore,  instead  of  going  over 
the  ground  the  second  time,  I  would  refer  to  what 
has  been  said  on  the  subject  of  internal  evidence. 

Miracles  also  furnish  the  most  conclusive  proof  of 
inspiration,  where  it  can  be  ascertained  that  the  wri¬ 
ter  of  any  book  of  Scripture  possessed  the  power  of 
performing  such  works ;  for  the  very  end  for  which 


240  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

miracles  were  exhibited,  was,  to  prove  that  the  per¬ 
son  speaking  was  sent  from  God  to  deliver  some 
message.  As  Nicodemus  properly  said,  “  We  know 
that  thou  art  a  teacher  come  from  God,  for  no  man 
can  do  the  miracles  which  thou  doest,  unless  God  be 
with  him.”  If  miracles  are  sufficient  to  prove  the 
truth  of  an  oral  communication,  will  they  not  also 
be  equally  conclusive  in  favour  of  a  written  declara¬ 
tion  ?  If  there  be  any  difference,  it  is  in  favour  of  the 
latter,  because  it  is  much  more  important  that  a 
written  discourse  intended  for  the  instruction  of  all 
ages  should  be  well  attested,  than  a  discourse  from 
the  lips,  which  is  heard  by  few,  and  can  never  be  re¬ 
covered  after  it  has  been  spoken. 

In  the  whole  of  what  has  been  said,  on  the  subject 
of  inspiration,  the  truth  of  the  “facts  recorded  in  the 
New  Testament  has  been  taken  for  granted;  and  also, 
that  the  Scriptures  contain  a  divine  revelation.  We 
are  not  arguing  with  infidels,  but  with  those  who, 
while  they  acknowledge  the  divine  origin  of  the 
Christian  religion,  doubt,  or  deny  that  the  persons 
who  wrote  the  books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament 
were  guided  by  a  plenary  inspiration.  Now,  as  these 
persons  admit  that  the  apostles  and  evangelists  were 
men  of  veracity  and  integrity,  their  testimony  on  this 
subject  ought  to  be  decisive.  .If  they  claim  inspira¬ 
tion,  we  cannot  deny  it  to  them,  without  invalidating 
all  the  strongest  evidences  of  the  truth  of  Christian¬ 
ity.  Why  were  they  endowed  with  the  power  of 
working  miracles,  but  that  full  credence  might  be 
given  to  what  they  testified?  And  when  they  declare 
that  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  that 
what  they  delivered  was  not  the  word  of  men,  but  the 
word  of  God  received  by  divine  revelation,  do  not 
these  miraculous  powers  which  they  possessed,  as 
fully  confirm  what  they  wrote  as  what  they  spoke? 

Having  before  shown  that  the  apostles  furnish  am¬ 
ple  testimony  to  the  inspiration  of  the  Old  Testament, 
we  shall  now  adduce  a  few  texts  to  prove  that  they 
claimed  inspiration  for  themselves.  Their  message 
is  every  where  called,  the  word  of  God.  Paul 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


241 


declares,  that  what  he  preached,  he  received  not  from 
man  but  “from  the  revelation  of  J®sus  Christ;”  that 
the  things  which  he  wrote  were  “the  commandments 
of  the  Lord;”  and  that  the  things  which  he  and  his 
brethren  taught,  “  God  had  revealed  to  them  by  his 
Spirit.”  He  therefore  declared,  that  he  who  des¬ 
pised  the  things  which  he  taught,  despised  not  men 
but  God.  Peter  ranks  the  commandments  delivered 
by  the  apostles  with  the'  words  of  the  holy  Prophets ; 
and  as  has  been  before  remarked,  reckons  the  epistles 
of  Paul  with  the  other  Scriptures.  John  says,  “  We 
are  of  God;  he  that  knoweth  God  heareth  us;  he 
that  is  not  of  God,  heareth  not  us.  Hereby  know  we 
the  spirit  of  truth,  and  the  spirit  of  error.” 

The  only  thing  wanting  to  complete  the  evidence 
of  the  inspiration  of  the  New  Testament,  and  conse¬ 
quently  that  of  the  Old,  is  to  show  that  these  writings 
were  received  unanimously  by  the  Christian  Church 
as  inspired  writings.  But  although  there  exists  abun¬ 
dant  evidence  of  this  fact,  to  pursue  it  would  lead  us 
too  much  into  detail,  and  would  not  comport  with 
the  studied  brevity  of  this  work.  And  I  am  the  less 
inclined  to  enter  on  the  labour  of  collecting  this  testi¬ 
mony  here,  because  this  will  be  done  in  a  subsequent 
part  of  the  work.  I  may  say,  however,  that  in  the 
early  ages  of  the  Church,  no  Christian  ever  called  in 
question  the  inspiration  of  the  sacred  volume ;  but  all 
held  this  as  a  fundamental  point  in  their  religion.  It 
was  left  for  those  who  chose  to  style  themselves 
rationalists,  in  modern  times,  to  admit  the  authentic¬ 
ity  of  the  facts  recorded  in  the  Bible,  while  they 
utterly  deny  the  plenary  inspiration  of  the  writers. 
But  this  is  ground  on  which  no  consistent  reasoner 
can  long  stand.  If  the  miracles  and  prophecies  of 
the  Scriptures  be  acknowledged,  and  the  divine  ori¬ 
gin  of  Christianity  admitted,  the  inspiration  of  the 
writers  of  these  books  must  follow  as  a  corollary.  It 
cannot  be  denied  without  the  greatest  inconsistency. 
And  on  the  other  hand,  if  inspiration  be  denied,  the 
authenticity  of  the  miracles  and  prophecies  will  soon 
be  abandoned.  The  course  of  theological  opinion 

21 


242 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


among  the  neologists  of  Germany,  for  a  number  of 
years  past,  furnishes  a  striking  illustration  of  the  truth 
of  the  aforesaid  observations.  For  a  time  the  assault, 
in  that  country,  was  merely  upon  the  doctrine  of 
inspiration;  but  no  sooner  wasqhat  ground  conceded, 
than  the  critics  directed  their  artillery  against  the 
authenticity  of  the  miraculous  facts  and  prophecies. 

There  is  no  end  to  the  objections  which  may  be 
started  against  the  plenary  inspiration  of  -the  Scrip¬ 
tures,  just  as  is  the  fact  in  regard  to  the  visible  uni¬ 
verse  as  the  work  of  God ;  and  it  cannot  be  denied 
that  there  is  a  striking  analogy  between  the  mode  of 
reasoning  pursued  by  atheists  and-  deists.  But  the 
foundation  of  all  their  arguments  is  human  ignorance. 
They  cannot  form  the  conception  of  a  creation  by  a 
being  of  almighty  power  and  infinite  wisdom,  and 
of  a  supernatural  revelation  from  such  a  being,  which 
would  not  be  liable  to  as  great  and  much  greater 
objections,  than  they  are  able  to  bring  forward  against 
his  works  and  word,  as  they  do  actually  exist.  If 
such  men  could  be  induced  in  a  calm  and  unpre¬ 
judiced  manner  to  examine  this  subject,  I  would 
recommend  to  them  a  careful  perusal  of  Butler’s 
Analogy  of  Natural  and  Revealed  Religion;  and  to 
the  deist  I  would  especially  recommend  the  seventh 
chapter  of  the  second  part,  where  the  author,  in  a 
manner  peculiar  to  himself,  makes  first  some  observa¬ 
tions  on  the  particular  evidences  of  Christianity,  and 
then,  in  the  close,  exhibits  si  view  of  the  evidence 
arising  from  a  general  survey  of  the  contents  of  the 
Bible.  The  argument,  as  presented  in  this  last  form, 
is  so  original  and  striking,  that  I  would  insert  it  in 
this  place,  were  I  not  afraid  of  swelling  this  volume 
to  an  inconvenient  size.  The  whole  of  the  second 
book  of  the  Analogy  may  be  considered  as  the  most 
satisfactory  method  of  meeting  the  popular  objections 
to  divine  revelation. 

In  regard  to  particular  objections,  arising  from  ap¬ 
parent  discrepancies,  from  extraordinary  facts,  and 
from  mysterious  doctrines  found  in  the  sacred  volume, 
it  will  be  sufficient  to  refer  the  inquisitive  reader  to 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY.  243 

the  first  volume  of  Home's  Introduction ,  and  to 
Dick's  deservedly  popular  work  on  Inspiration; 
and  also  to  learned  commentators,  some  of  whom 
have  taken  much  pains  to  reconcile  seeming  contra¬ 
dictions,  and  to  elucidate  obscure  passages,  by  an 
application  of  the  rules  of  sacred  criticism.  I  would 
only  further  remark  in  relation  to  the  usual  objections 
to  the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures,  that  they  militate 
as  fully  against  the  authenticity  of  the  facts  as  against 
the  inspiration  of  the  writers,  and  therefore  do  not 
require  to  be  considered  and  obviated  under  this 
head. 

A  summary  of  the  whole  evidence  for  the  plenary 
inspiration  of  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testament,  is  as  follows  :  all  the  Internal  Evidences 
of  Christianity — whether  arising  from  the  peculiar 
excellence  of  the  matter,  or  the  simplicity  and  sub¬ 
limity  of  the  style;  from  the  perfection  of  the  cha¬ 
racter  ascribed  to  Jesus  Christ;  from  the  continual 
recognition  of  the  over-ruling  providence  of  God, 
from  the  pure  and  elevated  spirit  of  devotion  which 
breathes  through  the  sacred  pages,  from  the  penetra¬ 
ting  and  transforming  efficacy  of  the  holy  Scriptures, 
and  from  their  adaptation  to  the  constitution  of  the 
human  mind,  and  to  the  existing  relations  among 
men,  go  to  prove,  that  they  were  written  under  the 
infallible  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

Again,  every  prophecy  which  has  been  fulfilled, 
furnishes  undoubted  and  independent  evidence  of  the 
inspiration  of  that  particular  part  of  the  Scriptures; 
and  all  the  laws  which  proceeded  from  the  mouth 
of  Jehovah  must  be  considered  as  infallible  precepts, 
unless  we  call  in  question  the  whole  truth  of  the 
narrative. 

The  writers,  for  the  most  part,  were  endued  with 
the  power  of  working  miracles.  These  facts,  it  is 
admitted,  prove  that  God  spake  by  them;  and  if  the 
prophets  and  apostles  were  inspired  in  the  discourses 
which  they  delivered,  then,  a  fortiori ,  they  must 
have  been  inspired  in  preparing  those  writings  which 


244  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

were  intended  to  guide  the  faith  and  practice  of  be¬ 
lievers  through  all  ages. 

Moreover,  the  sacred  writers  generally  lay  claim 
to  inspiration.  They  speak  authoritatively  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord.  They  call  their  message,  the 
word  of  God,  and  Christ  has  set  his  seal  to  the  ple¬ 
nary  inspiration  of  all  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  Tes¬ 
tament.  The  apostles  and  evangelists,  in  the  most 
explicit  manner,  declare  the  same  truth. 

Besides,  Christ  promised  plenary  inspiration  to  his 
disciples,  and  they  professed  to  be  under  the  guidance 
of  the  Spirit  in  what  they  wrote. 

And  finally,  while  some  of  the  apostles  were 
living,  their  writings  were  classed  with  the  divine 
Scriptures,  and  were  universally  received  as  inspired, 
and  as  the  infallible  word  of  God,  by  the  whole 
primitive  Church. 

We  cannot  but  conclude,  therefore,  that  all  the 
books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament  were  written 
by  the  inspiration  of  God,  and  contain  an  infallible 
rule  to  guide  the  faith  and  practice  of  the  church  to 
the  end  of  the  world. 


r 


CANONICAL  AUTHORITY 


OF  THE 

BOOKS  OK  SCRIPTURE. 


CHAPTER  XVI. 

THE  IMPORTANCE  OF  ASCERTAINING  THE  TRUE  CANON  OF  HOLY  SCRIPTURE, 

The  Bible  includes  a  large  number  of  separate  books, 
published  in  different  ages,  during  a  space  of  more 
than  fifteen  hundred  years.  Each  of  these  books, 
when  first  published,  formed  a  volume ;  or  at  least, 
the  writings  of  each  author  were,  in  the  beginning, 
distinct:  and  if  they  had  continued  in  that  separate 
form,  and  had  been  transmitted  to  us  in  many  vol¬ 
umes  instead  of  one,  their  authority  would  not  on 
this  account  have  been  less,  nor  their  usefulness 
diminished.  Their  collection  into  one  volume  is 
merely  a  matter  of  convenience ;  and  if  any  persons 
choose  now  to  publish  these  books  in  a  separate 
form,  they  cannot  with  propriety  be  charged  with 
casting  indignity  on  the  word  of  God. 

Hence  it  appears,  that  besides  general  arguments 
to  demonstrate  that  the  Bible  contains  a  divine  reve¬ 
lation,  there  is  need  of  special  proofs  to  evince  that 
each  of  the  books  now  included  in  that  sacred  vol¬ 
ume,  has  a  right  to  the  place  which  it  occupies,  or 
does  in  reality  contain  a  part  of  that  revelation  which 
God  has  given. 


21* 


245 


246 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 


If,  therefore,  it  could  be  shown  (which,  however 
it  never  can)  that  some  particular  book,  now  inclu¬ 
ded  in  the*  Bible,  was  not  authentic,  the  conclusion 
thence  derived  would  only  affect  that  single  produc¬ 
tion,  unless  it  were  recognized  as  divine  by  the  wri¬ 
ters  of  the  other  books.  The  credit  of  the  whole 
volume  would  not  be  destroyed,  even  if  it  could  be 
proved  that  one  half  the  books  of  which  it  consists 
were  spurious.  Infidels  have  much  more  to  effect 
in  overthrowing  the  Bible,  than  they  commonly  sup¬ 
pose.  It  is  incumbent  on  them  to  demonstrate,  not 
only  that  this  or  that  book  is  false,  but  that  every  one 
of  these  productions  is  destitute  of  evidence  that  it 
has  been  derived  from  the  inspiration  of  God. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  is  manifest,  that  the  advocate 
of  divine  revelation  is  bound  to  defend  the  claims  of 
every  separate  portion  of  this  volume,  or  to  reject 
from  it  that  part  which  has  no  evidence  of  a  divine 
origin.  It  is  necessary  that  he  should  be  able  to 
render  a  good  reason  why  he  admits  any  particular 
book  to  form  a  part  of  the  inspired  volume. 

It  is  true,  that  the  antiquity  of  this  collection  claims 
for  it  a  high  degree  of  respect:  the  transmission  of 
this  volume  to  us,  through  so  many  centuries,  as 
holy  scripture,  should  teach  us  to  be  cautious  how 
we  question  what  is  so  venerable  for  its  antiquity. 
But  this  only  furnishes  one  presumptive  argument 
in  favour  of  each  book.  It  by  no  means  renders 
all  further  investigation  unnecessary,  much  less,  im¬ 
pious. 

It  is  easy  to  conceive  that  books  not  written  by  the 
inspiration  of  God,  might,  by  some  casualty  or  mis¬ 
take,  find  a  place  in  the  sacred  volume;  In  fact,  we 
have  a  striking  example  of  this  very  thing  in  the 
'  Greek  and  Latin  Bibles  which  are  now  in  use,  and 
held  to  be  sacred  by  a  large  majority  of  those  who 
are  denominated  Christians.  These  Bibles,  besides 
the  books  which  have  evidence  of  being  truly  in¬ 
spired,  contain  a  number  of  other  books,  the  claim 
of  which  to  inspiration  cannot  be  sustained  by  solid 
and  satisfactory  reasons.  This  inquiry,  therefore,  is 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  247 

far  from  being  one  of  mere  curiosity:  it  is  in  the 
highest  degree  practical ,  and  concerns  the  conscience 
of  every  man  capable  of  making  the  investigation. 
We  agree,  in  the  general,  that  the  Bible  is  the  word 
of  God,  and  an  authoritative  rule;  but  the  momen¬ 
tous  question  immediately  presents  itself,  what  be¬ 
longs  to  the  Bible?  Of  what  books  does  this  sacred 
volume  consist?  And  it  will  not  answer,  to  resolve 
to  take  it  as  it  has  come  down  to  us,  without  further 
inquiry ;  for  the  Bible  has  come  down  to  us  in  seve¬ 
ral  different  forms..  The  Vulgate  Latin  Bible,  which 
alone  was  in  use  for  hundreds  of  years  before  the  era 
of  the  .Reformation,  and  also  the  Greek  version  of  the 
Old  Testament,  contain  many  books  not  in  the  copies 
of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures.  Now,  to  determine  which 
of  these  contains  the  whole  of  the  inspired  books 
given  to  the  Jews  before  the  advent  of  Christ,  and 
no  more,  requires  research  and  accurate  examination. 
The  inquiry,  therefore,  is  not  optional,  but  forces  itself 
upon  every  conscientious  man;  for  as  no  one  is  at 
liberty  to  reject  from  the  sacred  volume  one  sentence, 
much  less  a  whole  book  of  the  revelation  of  God,  so 
no  one  has  a  right  to  add  any  thing  to  the  word  of 
God :  and  of  consequence,  no  one  may  receive  as 
divine,  what  others  have  without  authority  added  to 
the  holy  scriptures.  Every  man,  therefore,  accord¬ 
ing  to  his  opportunity  and  capacity,  is  under  a  moral, 
obligation  to  use  his  best  endeavours  to  ascertain 
what  books  do  really  and  of  right  belong  to  the 
Bible.  An  error  here,  on  either  side,  is  dangerous; 
for,  on  the  one  hand,  if  we -reject  a  part  of  divine 
revelation,  we  dishonour  God,  and  deprive  ourselves 
of  the  benefit  which  might  be  ,  derived  from  that  por¬ 
tion  of  divine  truth;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  we  are 
guilty  of  an  equal  offence,  and  may  suffer  an  equal 
injury,  by  adding  spurious  productions  to  the  Holy 
Scriptures;  for  thus  we  adulterate  and  poison  the 
fountain  of  life,  and  subject  our  consciences  to  the 
authority  of  mere  men. 

I  think,  therefore,  that  the  importance  and  necessi¬ 
ty  of  this  inquiry  must  be  evident  to  every  person  of 


248  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

serious  reflection.  But  to  some  it  may  appear  that 
this  matter  has  been  long  ago  settled  on  the  firmest 
principles ;  and  that  it  can  answer  no  good  purpose 
to  agitate  questions  which  have  a  tendency  to  pro¬ 
duce  doubts  and  misgivings  in  the  minds  of  common 
Christians,  rather  than  a  confirmation  of  their  faith. 
In  reply  to  the  first  part  of  this  objection,  I  would 
say,  that  it  is  freely  admitted  that  this  subject  has 
been  ably  and  fully  discussed  long  ago,  and  in  almost 
every  age  until  the  present  time;  and  the  author 
aims  at  nothing  more,  in  this  short  treatise,  than  to 
exhibit  to  the  sincere  inquirer  who  may  not  enjoy 
better  means  of  information,  the  substance  of  those 
discussions  and  proofs,  which  ought  to  be  in  the  pos¬ 
session  of  every  Christian.  His  object  is,  not  to  bring 
forth  any  thing  new,  but  to  collect,  and  condense  in 
a  narrow  space,  what  has  been  written  by  the  judi¬ 
cious  and  the  learned,  on  this  important  subject.  But, 
that  discussion  tends  to  induce  doubting,  is  a  senti¬ 
ment  unworthy  of  Christians  who  maintain  that  their 
religion  is  founded  on  the  best  reasons,  and  who  are 
commanded  to  give  to  every  man  a  reason  of  the 
hope  that  is  in  them.  That  faith  which  is  weakened 
by  discussion  is  mere  prejudice,  not  true  faith.  They 
who  receive  the  most  important  articles  of  their  reli¬ 
gion  upon  trust  from  human  authority,  are  continu¬ 
ally  liable  to  be  thrown  into  doubt;  and  the  only 
method  of  obviating  this  evil,  is  to  dig  deep  and  lay 
our  foundation  upon  a  rock.  If  this  objection  had 
any  weight,  it  would  discourage  all  attempts  to  es¬ 
tablish  the  truth  of  our  holy  religion  by  argument; 
and  would  also  damp  the  spirit  of  free  inquiry  on 
every  important  subject.  It  is  true,  however,  that 
the  first  effect  of  free  discussion  may  be,  to  shake 
that  easy  confidence  which  most  men  entertain,  that 
all  their  opinions  are  correct;  but  the  beneficial  result 
will  be,  that  instead  of  a  persuasion,  having  no  other 
foundation  than  prejudice,  it  will  generate  a  faith 
resting  on  the  firm  basis  of  evidence. 

The  word  Canon  is  derived  from  a  Greek  word 
which  literally  signifies  a  rule,  and  is  several  times 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 


249 


used  in  the  New  Testament,  as  in  Gal.  vi.  6.  Phil, 
iii.  16.  And  as  the  inspired  books  are  the  authori 
tative  rule  to  regulate  our  faith  and  practice,  the 
early  fathers  gave  to  them  this  name ;  all  such  books 
were  called  canonical;  and  thus  they  have  been 
denominated  ever  since.  Thus  Irenas  us  speaks  of 
the  Holy  Scriptures  as  the  canon  of  truth;  Cle¬ 
ment  of  Alexandria^  employs  the  appellation  of  the 
true  evangelical  canon;  Eusebius  calls  the  Scrip¬ 
tures  the  ecclesiastical  canon,  and  Athanasius 
speaks  of  the  three  sorts  of  books;  1.  The  canoni¬ 
cal;  2.  Such  as  might  be  read;  And  3.  The  apocry¬ 
phal.  The  council  of  Laodicea  ordained,  that  none 
but  canonical  books  should  be  read  in  the  Church, 
that  is,  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament. 

In  the  same  language  •  are  the  inspired  books  de¬ 
scribed  by  the  other  fathers  and  councils. 

In  treating  this  subject,  it  will  be  necessary  to  in¬ 
quire  into  the  claims  which  every  book  now  received 
by  Jews  or  Christians,  Romanists  or  Protestants,  has 
to  a  place  in.  the  canon.  Where  there  is  a  universal 
agreement  among  all  who  receive  the  Scriptures, 
little  need  be  said ;  but  in  regard  to  disputed  points, 
it  will  be  necessary  to  be  more  particular. 


CHAPTER  XVII. 


THE  CARE  WITH  WHICH  THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT  WERE  PRE¬ 
SERVED  - THEIR  CANONICAL  AUTHORITY - THE  SANCTION  GIVEN  TO 

THESE  BOOKS  BY  THE  SAVIOUR  AND  HIS  APOSTLES - AND  THE  METHOD 

OF  ASCERTAINING  WHAT  BOOKS  WERE  IN  THE  CANON  AT  THE  TIME  OF 

Christ’s  advent. 


It  would  be  reasonable  to  conclude,  even  if  nothing 
had  been  said,  that  a  book  written  by  divine  inspira¬ 
tion  would,  by  all  pious  persons,  be  carefully  pre¬ 
served.  But  we  are  expressly  informed,  that  when 
Moses  had  finished  writing  the  law,  he  “  command- 


250 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


ed  the  Levites  which  bore  the  ark  of  the  covenant 
of  the  Lord,  saying,  Take  this  book  of  the  law, 
and  put  it  in  the  side  of  the  ark  of  the  covenant  of 
the  Lord  your  God,  that  it  may  be  there  for  a  wit¬ 
ness  against  thee.”* 

Here,  in  the  most  sacred  part  of  the  sanctuary,  the 
Pentateuch  was  preserved  as  a  sacred  deposite.  On 
one  occasion,  indeed,  it  seems  to  have  been  displaced, 
and  its  integrity  endangered,  when  in  the  reigns  of 
Manasseh  and  Amon  idolatry  so  prevailed,  that  the 
true  worship  of  God  was  suspended.  During  this 
period  of  darkness,  the  law  was  cast  out  among  the 
rubbish,  where  it  was  found  in  the  reign  of  the  pious 
Josiah.t  But  whiles  the  autograph  of  Moses  was 
laid. up  by  the  side  of  the  ark,  we  are  not  to  suppose 
that  there  were  no  authentic  copies  of  this  sacred 
book  among  the  people.  Josephus  relates,  that  every 
tribe,  by  the  command  of  Moses,  was  furnished  with 
a  copy.  And  as  it  contained  the  liturgy  for  the  pub¬ 
lic  worship  of  God,  the  rites  of  which  were  very  nu¬ 
merous,  and  the  regulations  very  minute,  the  priests 
and  Levites  must  have  been  supplied  with  copies,  to 
enable  them  rightly  to  conduct  the  public  service. 
This  book  also  contained  the  law  of  the  land,  and 
prescribed  the  duties  of  kings  and  rulers;  on  which 
account  it  was  expressly  commanded,  that  when 
there  should  be  a  king,  “He  shall  write  him  a  copy 
of  this  law  in  a  book,  out  of  that  which  is  before 
the  priests,  the  Levites,”! 

It  would,  however,  be  unreasonable  to  expect  that 
the  autograph  of  Moses  could  last  until  this  period 
of  the  world.  What  became  of  it  is  not  known. 
The  probability  is,  that  it  perished  with  the  ark,  in 
the  destruction  of  the  temple  by  Nebuchadnezzar. 
And  this  fact  probably  occasioned  the  tradition  which 
was  prevalent  among  the  Jews,  that  the  sacred  Scrip¬ 
tures  were  utterly  lost  in  the  destruction  of  Jerusa¬ 
lem  by  the  Chaldeans;  and  that  they  were  restored 
by  Ezra,  by  divine  inspiration.  Now  it  is  probable 

*  Deut.  xxxi.  25,  26.  t  Deut.  xvii.  18. 

t  2  Kings  xxii.  9,  10,  11.  y 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


251 


that  the  autographs  were  lost,  and  that  Ezra  the 
scribe,  who  was  an  inspired  man,  collected  the  scat¬ 
tered  copies  of  the  sacred  books,  corrected  their  errors, 
and  thus  restored  the  Scriptures  to  their  original  in¬ 
tegrity.  On  account  of  this  important  and  pious 
labour,  the  constitution  of  the  canon  of  the  Old  Tes¬ 
tament  is  by  the  Jews  ascribed  to  Ezra;  and  they 
join  with  him,  as  assistants,  “  the  men  of  the  great 
synagogue,”  some  of  whom  were  prophets,  by  whose 
aid  the  sacred  volume  was  prepared,  and  copies  cir¬ 
culated  among  the  people.  In  such  a  work,  he  would 
need  many  coadjutors;  and  no  more  holy  or  import¬ 
ant  work  could  have  occupied  the  time  and  attention 
of  inspired  men.  It  is  reasonable  to  believe,  there¬ 
fore,  that  all  who  were  qualified  to  render  effectual 
aid  in  this  service,  would  be  ready  to  assist  Ezra  in 
correcting  and  preparing  the  Holy  Scriptures,  for 
general  use.  *  - 

That  all  the  copies  of  the  law  were  not  lost,,  is  as 
evident  as  any  thing  can  be ;  for  Daniel  in  the  captivity 
had  possession  of  the  prophecies  of  Jeremiah.  And 
Ezra  himself  was  a  “  ready  scribe  in  the  law;”  and 
in  the  sixth  chapter  of  Ezra  we  read,  that  the  func¬ 
tions  of  the  priests  were  regulated  after  the  second 
temple  was  finished,  “as  it  is  written  in  the  book  of 
Moses;”  and  this  was  many  years  before  Ezra  came 
to  Jerusalem.  And  in  the  eighth  chapter  of  Nehe- 
miah  it  is  said,  that  Ezra  “  brought  the  law  before 
the  congregation,  and  read  therein  from  morning 
until  mid-day.” 

In  regard  to  the  other  books,  little  is  said.  We 
read,  however,  that  the  writings  of  Joshua  were 
annexed  to  the  law,  and  of  course  deposited  with  it 
by  the  side  of  the  ark;  and  we  may  take  it  for  grant¬ 
ed,  as  a  matter  of  course,  than  when  any  prophet  or 
inspired  man  had  finished  a  writing  intended  for 
general  use,  it  was  added  to  the  volume  of  the  law, 
and  preserved  with  it. 

How  carefully  the  writings  of  Moses  were  read 
and  accurately  remembered,  appears  from  the  fre¬ 
quent  reference  made  to  the  facts  there  recorded  by 


252 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


the  writers  who  came  after  Moses;  especially,  by  the 
holy  men  who  composed  the  book  of  Psalms.  And 
that  this  knowledge  was  commonly  possessed  by  men 
not  inspired,  will  appear  from  the  full  and  accurate 
recapitulation  of  the  history  recorded  in  the  law,  in 
the  complete  and  eloquent  answer  given  by  Jepthah 
to  the  king  of  the  Ammonites.*  The  writings  of  the 
prophets  also  abound  in  references  to  facts  recorded 
in  the  law  of  Moses. 

On  what  material : the  Scriptures  were  written,  in 
what  character  or  alphabet,  whether  bound  up  in  a 
single  volume  or  in  several;  whether  preserved  in 
rolls,  as  in  the  synagogues  now,  or  in  the  common 
form  of  our  books,  are  inquiries  which  are  worthy 
the  attention  of  the  biblical  student,  but  no  way 
necessary  to  our  purpose,  at  present. 

That  which  is  of  the  utmost  importance  is,  to  know 
that  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  and  his  inspired  apostles, 
gave  their  unqualified  sanction  to  the  Scriptures 
which  were  in  use  and  read  in  the  synagogues,  in 
their  time.  Christ  severely  censures  the  Scribes  and 
Pharisees  and  Lawyers  for  neglecting  to  obey  the 
Scriptures,  and  for  misrepresenting  them  and  render¬ 
ing  the  law  of  God  void  by  their  vain  traditions;  but 
he  never  hints  that  they  had  corrupted  the  sacred 
text.  On  the  contrary*  he  refers  to  the  Scriptures, 
then  extant  among  the  Jews,  as  an  infallible  stand¬ 
ard.  “Search  the  Scriptures,”  said  he;  “for  in 
them  ye  think  ye  have  eternal  life,  and  they  are  they 
which  testify  of  me.”t  Again,  “  Ye  do  err,  not 
knowing  the  Scriptures.”;!:  He  proves  his  doctrine 
by  the  Scriptures,  “  which  cannot  be  broken, ”§  and 
it  is  asserted  repeatedly,  that  certain  things  came  to 
pass,  “that  the  Scriptures  might  be- fulfilled.” ||  Yea, 
Christ  himself  declares  “  they  must  be  fulfilled.”1F 
And  Paul*  says,  “All  Scripture  is  given  by  inspiration 
of  God.”**  They  are  also  by  this  apostle  called  “the 

*  Judges  xi. 

t  John  v.  39. 

t  Matt.  xxii.  29. 

§  John  x.  35. 


||  Mark  xiv.  49. 

H  Matt.  xxvi.  54. 
**  2  Tim.  iii.  16. 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY.  253 

oracles  op  God,*  the  word  of  Gon.”t  And  Peter 
says,  “the  prophecy  came  not  in  old  time  by  the 
will  of  man,  but  holy  men  of  God  spake  as  they  were 
moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost.” $  And  James  speaks  of 
the  Scriptures  with  equal  confidence  and  respect. 
“And  receive  with  meekness,”  says  he,  “the  ingraft¬ 
ed  word,  which  is  able  to  save  your  souls”§ — “  And 
the  Scripture  was  fulfilled  which  saith,”  &c.|| 

Thus  it  appears,  that  we  have  the  best  possible 
evidence  that  the  scriptures  which  were  in  use 
when  Christ  was  upon  earth,  were  entire  and  uncor¬ 
rupted,  and  were  an  infallible  rule;  and  that  men 
erred  from  not  knowing  or  understanding  them. 
Whether  these  scriptures  were  included  in  one 
book  or  in  several,  is  of  no  consequence.  In  one 
place,  our  Lord  refers  to  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old 
Testament  under  the  name  of  Moses  and  the  Pro- 
phets.IF  They  seem,  however,  to  have  been  divided 
into  three  parts,  called  by  our  Saviour,  “  the  Law, 
the  Prophets,  and  the  Psalms.”**  This  exactly 
corresponds  with  the  ancient  division  of  the  Jews, 
into  the  Law,  Prophets,  and  Hagiographa,  which  is 
mentioned  by  Josephus.  But  whether  there  were 
three  separate  volumes,  or  only  one,  is  a  matter  of 
no  manner  of  consequence,  any  more  than  it  is  now, 
whether  the  canonical  Scriptures  are  included  in  one 
or  two  volumes. 

The  only  difficulty  which  remains  is,  to  ascertain 
what  books  were  actually  extant,  at  that  time,  under 
the  name  of  scriptures.  If  we  can  settle  this  point 
satisfactorily,  the  proof  of  the  canon  of  the  Old  Testa¬ 
ment.  will  be  complete. 

In  the  first  place,  then,  it  may  be  observed,  that 
the  most  important  parts  of  the  Old  Testament  are 
expressly  quoted.  We  have  seen  that  our  Lord 
mentions  the  Law,  the  Prophets  and  the  Psalms; 

*  Romans  iii.  2.  Heb.  v.  12. 

t  Rom.  ix.  6.  x.  17.  1  Cor.  xiv.  36.  2  Cor.  ii.  17.  Ephes.  vi.  17 

Col.  i.  25.  1  Thessii.  13.  1  Tim.  ii.  9. 

t  2  Peter  i.  21. 

§  James  i.  21.  22.  IT  Luke  xvi.  29,  31. 

||  J ames  iv.  5  **  Luke  xxiv.  44. 


22 


254  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

and  several  of  the  prophets  are  named,  and  citations 
are  made  from  others.  Now,  as  far  as  this  evidence 
goes,  it  is  complete;  but  it  must  be  acknowledged, 
that  several  books  now  in  the  canon  of  the  Old  Tes¬ 
tament,  are  not  named  nor  quoted.  In  regard  to 
these  we  must  resort  to  other  evidence. 

The  next  proof  is  derived  from  the  copies  of  the 
Hebrew  Bible  in  the  hands  of  the  Jews.  If  our 
canon  is  not  the  same  as  the  one  in  use  in  the  time 
of  Christ,  the  alteration  must  have  been  made  by  the 
Christians,  either  by  adding  or  taking  away  some 
books.  But  if  this  had  been  done,  the  fraud  could 
easily  have  been  detected  by  referring  to  the  Jewish 
Scriptures ;  for  no  one  can  suppose  that  they  would 
join  in  collusion  with  Christians,  to  mar  or  adulterate 
their  own  sacred  volume.  Such  has  been  the  hostili¬ 
ty  between  the  Jews  and  Christians  from  the  begin¬ 
ning,  that  they  have  been  mutually  safeguards  of  the 
inspired  books,  to  preserve  them  from  alteration  by 
one  party  or  the  other.  All  that  is  necessary,  there¬ 
fore,  is  to  compare  our  copies  of  the  Hebrew  Scrip¬ 
tures  with  those  found  among  the  Jews.  The  result 
of  this  comparison  is,  that  in  regard  to  this  point, 
there  is  a  perfect  agreement  between  the  Jews  and 
Protestant  Christians.  We  claim  a  place  for  no  book 
in  the  canon  which  they  do  not  acknowledge  to  be 
inspired ;  and  they  bring  no  accusation  against  Pro¬ 
testants  for  having  mutilated  the  sacred  volume  by 
abstracting  from  it  any  book  or  chapter. 

But  again,  we  are  able  to  approach  very  near  to 
direct  and  full  proof  of  the  point  in  hand,  from  a 
most  unsuspected  quarter.  Josephus,  who  was  con¬ 
temporary  with  the  apostle  Paul,  and  himself  not 
only  a  learned  man,  but  a  priest,  has  left  on  record 
a  testimony  which  every  impartial  man  will  consider 
satisfactory.  “We  have,”  says  he,  “only  two  and 
twenty  books  which  are  to  be  believed  as  of  divine 
authority.  Of  which,  five  are  the  books  of  Moses. 
From  the  death  of  Moses  to  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes, 
the  son  of  Xerxes,  king  of  Persia,  the  prophets,  who 
were  the  successors  of  Moses,  have  written  in  thir- 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 


255 


teen  books.  The  remaining  four  books  contain 
hymns  to  God,  and  instructions  of  life  for  the  use  of 
men.”  Here  the  number  and  the  description  of  the 
books,  considered  of  divine  authority,  furnish  satis¬ 
factory  testimony,  that  the  canon  of  the  Jews  in  the 
time  of  our  Saviour  corresponds  entirely  with  ours. 

At  first  View  it  might  seem,  that  we  had  many 
more  than  two  and  twenty  books  in  the  volume  of 
the  Old  Testament ;  but  this  difficulty  will  be  easily 
removed,  when  it  is  considered,  that  the  Jews  always 
reckoned  the  twelve  minor  prophets  as  one  book; 
and  the  book  of  Ruth  they  considered  an  appendage 
to  Judges,  and  the  Lamentations  of  Jeremiah  an 
appendage  to  his  prophecy.  Thus  the  number  will 
be  reduced  exactly  to  twenty-two. 

We  have,  besides,  the  direct  testimony  of  early 
Christian  writers.  Meeito,  bishop  of  Sardis,  who 
lived  in  the  second  century,  took  the  trouble  of  mak¬ 
ing  a  journey  into  Judea,  to  inquire  into  this  matter ; 
and  although  his  own  work  has  not  come  down  to 
us,  Eusebius  has  preserved  his  catalogue  of  the  books 
of  the  Old  Testament ;  from  which  it  appears  that 
the  sacred  canon  coptained  then  the  very  same  books 
which  are  now  included  in  it. 

To  Melito  we  may  add  the  testimony  of  Origen, 
who  spent  much  of  his  time  in  a  place  near  to  Judea, 
and  who  was  skilled  in  the  Hebrew  tongue.  This 
learned  man  has  left  a  catalogue  of  the  books  of  the 
Old  Testament,  which  perfectly  corresponds  with  our 
canon,  except  that  he  has  omitted  the  twelve  minor 
prophets ;  which  book,  however,  he  recognizes  in 
other  places  as  a  part  of  the  sacred  volume. 

Besides  having  catalogues  by  many  other  of  the 
fathers,' we  have  the  testimony  of  two  councils;  that 
of  Laodicea,  and  of  Carthage ;  both  of  which  made 
out  catalogues  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament, 
which  are  in  perfect  accordance  with  the  canon  as 
now  constituted. 

If  other  proof  were  needed,  it  might  be  found  in 
the  Samaritan  Pentateuch,  as  far  as  the  law  is  con¬ 
cerned;  and  in  the  Septuagint  version,  which  con- 


256  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

tains  all  the  books  which  are  now  in  the  Old  Testa¬ 
ment,  in  the  Hebrew  Bibles.  This  version  was  made 
nearly  three  centuries  before  the  birth  of  Christ,  and 
had  long  been  in  general  and  familiar  use,  even  in 
the  land  of  Judea.  It  is  true,  that  this  version,  as  it 
has  come  down  to  us,  while  it  comprehends  all  the 
books  now  in  the  canon,  includes  what  is  called  the 
apocrypha;  therefore,  while  it  furnishes  full  proof 
that  nothing  has  been  taken  away,  we  cannot  refer  to  it 
for  proof  that  nothing  has  been  added.  But 
the  inquiry  respecting  the  apocryphal  books,  which 
claim  a  place  in  the  canon,  will  bp  taken  up  in  the 
next  chapter. 

Further  proof  of  the  canon  of  the  Old  Testament 
might  be  derived  from  the  early  versions  made  soon 
after  the  commencement  of  the  Christian  era;  par¬ 
ticularly  the  Syriac,  and  Latin  V ulgate ;  as  also  from 
the  quotations  of  the  early  Christian  writers;  from 
the  Targums,  which  contain  a  paraphrase  of  all  the 
books  of  the  Old  Testament  in  Chaldee.  And  abun¬ 
dant  evidence  of  the  same  thing  might  be  drawn  from 
the  Talmud,  which  contains  the  oral  law  of  the  Jews. 
But  as  what  has  already  been  adduced  is  sufficient, 
we  deem  it  unnecessary  to  multiply  proofs  in  a  mat¬ 
ter  so  evident. 

Having  shown  that  our  canon  of  the  Old  Testa¬ 
ment  is  the  same  as  that  which  existed  in  the  time 
of  our  Saviour,  to  which  he  gave  his  full  and  empha¬ 
tic  approbation,  it  follows  of  course,  that  none  of  the 
books  which  ever  made  a  part  of  the  sacred  volume 
have  been  lost.  But  here  we  are  met  with  an  objec¬ 
tion  derived  from  the  Old  Testament  itself,  where 
several  books  are  spoken  of  and  referred  to,  which 
cannot  now  be  found.  For  example,  it  is  said  of 
Solomon,  “that  he  spake  three  thousand  proverbs, 
and  his  songs  were  a  thousand  and  five.  And  he 
spake  of  the  trees,  from  the  cedar  in  Lebanon  even 
unto  the  hyssop  that  springeth  out  of  the  wall;  he 
spake  also  of  beasts,  and  of  fowl,  and  of  creeping 
things,  and  of  the  fishes.”* 

J*  1  Kings  iv.  32,  33. 


^EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  25 7 

We  read  also  of  “  the  book  of  Samuel  the  seer,” 
and  “  the  book  of  Nathan  the  prophet;”  and  “the 
hook  of  Gad  the  seer.”*  Mention  is  also  made  of 
the  book  of  “  Jasher ;”  and  of  the  book  of  “  the  wars 
of  the  Lord,”  &c.t 

In  answer  to  this  objection  it  will  be  sufficient  to 
remark,  that  there  is  no  evidence  that  these  composi¬ 
tions  of  Solomon  were  ever  written,  as  the  text  only 
says,  that  he  spake  these  things;  but  supposing  them 
to  have  been  written,  there  is  no  evidence  that  they 
were  ever  intended  to  be  a  part  of  the  sacred  canon ; 
or  that  these  compositions  were  inspired :  for  it  is  not 
necessary  to  suppose  that  either  prophets  or  apostles 
had  inspiration  to  direct  them  in  all  matters  of  com¬ 
mon  life,  or  in  writing  on  subjects  of  natural  science. 

But  in  regard  to  the  books  of  certain  prophets  and 
seers,  it  is  highly  probable,  that  those  men  assisted  in 
writing  the  historical  books  of  Samuel,  Kings,  and 
Chronicles. 

And  as  to  the  book  of  Jasher,  and  the  book  of  the 
wars  of  the  Lord,  too  little  is  known  about  them  to 
authorize  us  to  think  that  they  formed  a  part  of  the 
ancient  canon  ;  unless  we  adopt  the  opinion,  that  we 
still  possess  them  under  other  names.  Here  it  may 
with  propriety  be  observed,  that  the  Hebrew  word 
for  book,  is  used  to  signify" any  list  or  genealogy; 
arid,  accordingly,  it  is  the  opinion  of  judicious  com¬ 
mentators,  that  the  “  book  of  the  wars  of  the  Lord,” 
was  nothing  but  a  muster-roll  of  the  army.  And 
the  book  of  “  Jasher”  (rectitude)  may  have  been  a 
compend  of  moral  rules  derived  from  the  Scriptures ; 
or  a  manual  (not  inspired,)  composed  by  the  wise 
for  the  conduct  of  life.  The  mere  mention  of  a  hook, 
or  citation  of  a  sentence  from  it,  by  no  means  gives 
it  a  place  in  the  canon. 

There  is  no  probability  that  any  of  the  canonical 
books  could  have  been  lost  from  the  Old  Testament, 
when  we  consider  with  what  religious,  and  even 
superstitious  care,  they  have  been  kept  and  trans¬ 
cribed  by  the  Jewish  scribes. 

1*1  Cliron.  xxix.  29,  30.  t  1  Sam.  i.  18.  Num,  xxi.  14. 

22* 


258 


EVIDENCES'  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


The  Rabbis  among  the  Jews  view  this  matter  as 
we  do :  they  never  complain,  nor  even  hint,  that  the 
sacred  volume  had  been  mutilated. 

And  the  unqualified  testimony  in  favour  of  the 
Old  Testament  scriptures  by  Christ  and  his  apostles, 
already  referred  to,  ought  to  be  decisive  on  this  point, 
if  all  other  evidence  was  wanting. 


‘  CHAPTER  XVIII. 

\  * 

THE  BOOKS  DENOMINATED  APOCRYPHAL  HAVE  NO  JUST  CLAIM  TO  A  PLACE 
AMONG  THE  CANONICAL  SCRIPTURES  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

The  word  Apocrypha  probably  signifies  that  which 
is  hidden ,  obscure ,  without  authority.  It  is  em¬ 
ployed  to  designate  such  writings  as  claim  a  place  in 
the  canon,  without  possessing  sutficient  evidence  to 
substantiate  their  claims.  This  word  is  said  to  have 
been  first  used  by  Melito,  bishop  of  Sardis,  in  the 
second  century.  The  subject  acquires  great  import¬ 
ance  from  the  fact,  that  it  was  'formerly  and  is  now 
a  matter  of  earnest  controversy,  between  Romanists 
and  Protestants,  whether  certain  books  which  are 
frequently  included  in  Greek  and  Latin  copies  of  the 
Bible,  are  canonical,  or  should  be  considered  apocry¬ 
phal.  The  number  of  books  in  dispute  is  six,  name¬ 
ly,  Tobit,  Judith,  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  Ba¬ 
ruch,  and  the  two  books  of  Maccabees;  and  also, 
some  additional  chapters  annexed  to  the  book  of 
Esther,  which  are  not  in  the  Hebrew ;  and  to  the 
book  of  Daniel,  the  History  of  Susannah,  and  the 
Sons;  of  the  Three  Children  are  prefixed,  and  the 
History  of  Bel  and  the  Dragon  is  annexed.  These 
books,  and  portions  of  books,  are  likewise  placed  at 
the  end  of  the  Old  Testament,  in  our  larger  English 
Bibles,  under  the  name  apocrypha. 

The  council  of  Trent,  which  sat  in  the  sixteenth 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


259 


century,  have  given  a  catalogue  of  the  canonical 
hooks  of  Scripture,  in  which  those  above  mentioned 
are  included  ;  and  they  are  inserted  promiscuously 
with  the  other  books,  in  the  editions  of  the  Latin 
Vulgate,  and  in  all  other  versions  prepared  by  mem¬ 
bers  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  They  consider 
all  copies  of  the  Bible  imperfect  and  mutilated,  in 
which  these  books  are  not  found;  and  this  has  created 
a  great  obstacle  to  the  circulation  of  the  Scriptures 
among  the  people  of  that  persuasion,  as  Protestant 
Bible  societies  have  come  to  a  resolution  not  to  cir¬ 
culate  Bibles  which  contain  those  books  which  they 
deem  apocryphal. 

To  show  that  these  books  are  not  canonical,  but 
apocryphal,  the  following  arguments  are  deemed  suf¬ 
ficient. 

1.  These  books  are  not  found  in  the  Hebrew  Bible; 
nor  are  they  written  in  the  Hebrew  tongue,  but  in 
the  Greek  or  Chaldaic.  For  the  proof  of  this  fact  we 
have  the  testimony  of  Jerome,  a  competent  witness, 
who  translated  several  of  them  into  Latin.  There  is 
strong  reason  to  believe,  that  all  these  books  were 
composed  originally  in  the  Greek  language,  which 
was  unknown  to  the  Jews  until  after  the  eanon  of 
the  Old  Testament  was  closed.  It  has  been  always 
the  current  opinion,  both  among  Jews  and  Christians, 
that  Malachi  was  the  last  of  the  Old  Testament  wri¬ 
ters;  and  books  written  by  uncertain  authors  after 
the  spirit  6f  prophecy  had  ceased,  have  no  just  claim 
to  a  place  in  the  sacred  canon.  The  date  of  the  com¬ 
position  of  these  books  cannot  be  accurately  fixed; 
but  that  it  occurred  long  after  the  time  of  Ezra  and 
Malachi,  there  can  be  no  ground  of  reasonable  doubt. 

2.  A  second  argument  is,  that  these  disputed  books 
have  never  been  acknowledged  by  the  Jews  to  be 
of  divine  authority,  nor  have  by  them  been  admitted 
into  the  canon;  and  they  are  the  best  judges  of  what 
books  properly  belonged  to  their  sacred  Scriptures. 
If  these  books  had  been  of  divine  authority,  the  fact 
would  have  been  known  to  the  Jewish  Church,  to 
which  “  the  oracles  of  God  were  committed.”  And 


260  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

if  they  had  ever  belonged  to  the  canon,  they  would 
not  have  been  left  out  afterwards. 

The  opinion  of  the  ancient  and  modern  Jews  on 
this  point  is  the  same;  and  there  is  among  them  no 
diversity  of  opinion  respecting  this  matter.  Josephus, 
in  a  passage  already  quoted,  declares,  “  that  no  more 
than  twenty-two  books  were  received  as  inspired  by 
his  nation.”  And  although  Philo  Judaeus  refers  often 
to  the  Old  Testament,  and  comments  largely  on  its 
contents  in  his  writings,  he  never  makes  the  least 
mention  of  any  one  of  these  books. 

But  if  the  ancient  Jews  knew  any  thing  of  -these 
books  as  a  part  of  their  sacred  canon,  we  should 
certainly  find  it  in  the  voluminous  writings  of  the 
Talmud;  but  not  one  of  these  books  is  recognized  as 
canonical  in  this  great  body  of  Jewish  traditions.  It 
may  certainly  be  inferred,  therefore,  that  they  were 
not  considered  canonical  by  the  ancient  Jews. 

And  the  more  modern  Jews  are  so  far  from  ac¬ 
knowledging  them,  that  their  testimony  is  expressly 
against  them.  Rabbi  Azariah  says,  “  they  are  re¬ 
ceived  by  Christians,  not  by  us.”  He  means  Ro¬ 
manists,  who  acknowledged  them  as  we  have  seen. 
And  Rabbi  Gedaliah,  as  quoted  by  Hottinger,  has 
the  following  testimony.  After  giving  a  catalogue 
of  inspired  books  received  by  the  Jews,  he  goes  on 
to  say,  “  It  is  worth  while  to  know,  that  the  nations 
of  the  world  wrote  many  other  books1  which  are  in¬ 
cluded  in  their  systems  of  sacred  books,  but  are  not 
in  our  hands.”  To. which  he  adds,  “They  say  that 
some  of  these  are  found  in  the  Chaldee,  some  in  the 
Arabic,  and  some  in  the  Greek  language.” 

Rabbi  Azariah,  before  mentioned,  ascribes  the 
Wisdom  of  Solomon  to  Philo.  And  Rabbi  Geda¬ 
liah  observes,  “  That  if  Solomon  ever  wrote  it,  it 
must  have  been  in  the  Syriac  language,  to  send  it  to 
some  of  the  kings  in  the  remotest  part  of  the  east.” 
“But,”  says  he,  “Ezra  only  put  his  hand  to  such 
books  as  were  published  by  the  prophets  under  the 
guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  written  in  the  sacred 
language.  And  our  wise  men  prudently  and  delib- 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  261 

erately  resolved  to  sanction  none  but  such  as  were 
established  by  him.”  “  Their  wise  men,”  says  Bux- 
torf,  “  pronounced  this  book  to  be  apocryphal.” 

The  book  called  Ecclesiasticus,  is  expressly 
numbered  among  apocryphal  books  in  the  Talmud; 
where  it  is  said, 66  In  the  book  of  the  son  of  Sirach  it 
is  forbidden  tp  read.”  And  Manasseh  ben  Israel, 
one  of  the  most  learned  of  the  modern  Jews,  observes, 
“  that  those  things  which  are  alleged  from  a  verse  in 
Ecclesiasticus,  are  nothing  to  the  purpose,  because 
this  is  an  apocryphal  book.”  In  the  same  way,  they 
are  wont  to  speak  of  all  these  books;  and  Jerome 
informs  us,  that  he  heard  one  of  the  Jews  deriding 
the  history  of  Susannah,  who  said  it  was  invented 
by  some  Greek,  he  knew  not  whom.”  It  is  unneces¬ 
sary  to  add  further  testimonies,  because  the  fact  that 
the  Jews  never  did  receive  the  apocrypha  as  a  part 
of  their  canon,  cannot  be  denied. 

3.  The  third  p.rgument  against  the  canonical  au¬ 
thority  of  the  aforementioned  books,  is,  that  they  are 
never  cited  or  referred  to  as  a  part  of  sacred  Scrip¬ 
ture,  in  the  whole  of  the  New  Testament.  We  are 
aware  that  on  this  point  we  are  at  issue  with  the 
Homan  Catholics.  They  even  pretend  to  prove  their 
right  to  a  place  in  the  canon,  from  quotations  said  to 
be  made  from  them  by  Paul.  One  of  the  passages 
alleged  is,  “  For  who  hath  known  the  mind  of  the 
Lord, or  who  has  been  his  counsellor?”*  And  the 
other  ife,  “For  before  his  translation  he  had  this  testi¬ 
mony,  that  he  pleased  God.”t  But  both  these  pas¬ 
sages  are  taken  from  the  canonical  books  of  the  Old 
Testament ;  and  there  is  no  reason  to  think  that  the 
apostle  had  any  thought  of  the  apocrypha  when  he 
cited  these  texts. 

4.  The  fourth  argument  against  the  divine  autho¬ 
rity  of  these  books  is,  that  they  were  not  received  as 
inspired  by  the  Christian  fathers;  but  were  express¬ 
ly  rejected  from  the  sacred  canon,  almost  with  one 
consent,  by  those  who  were  best  qualified  to  judge 
of  their  claims.  In  all  the  catalogues  drawn  up  by 

*  Rom.  xi.  34.  t  Ileb.  xi.  5. 


262 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


fathers  and  councils,  for  the  veiy  purpose  of  teaching 
the  Church  what  books  should  be  reci-eved  as  of  di¬ 
vine  authority,  these  are  uniformly  omitted.  Justin 
Martyr,  Origen,  Athanasius,  Hilary,  Gregory  Nazian- 
zen,  Jerome,  Epiphanius,  and  Cyril,  together  with 
the  councils  of  Laodicea  and  Carthage,  have  left 
catalogues  of  the  canonical  hooks  of  the  Old  Testa¬ 
ment,  among  which,  not  one  of  these  is  to  be  found. 
And  they  almost  all  number  the  books  agreeably  to 
the  Jewish  custom,  and  make  the  number  twenty- 
two,  according  to  the  number  of'  letters  in  the  He¬ 
brew  Alphabet.  And  not  only  so,  but  many  of  these 
learned  fathers  make  express  mention  of  these  books, 
and  explicitly  reject  them  from  the  sacred  canon. 
This  is  especially  the  case  in  regard  to  Jerome,  who 
wrote  prefaces  to  most  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Tes¬ 
tament,  and  in  these  he  takes  occasion  to  mention 
those  now  in  question,  and  declares  them  all  to  be 
apocryphal.  And  this  continued  to  be  the  common 
opinion  among  the  most  learqed  theologians  down 
to  the  time  of  the  Reformation,  as  Dr.  Cosins  has 
abundantly  shown  in  his  “Scholastic  History  of  the 
Canon  of  the  Old  Testament.” 

5.  As  the  external  evidence  is  unfavourable  to  the 
canonical  authority  of  the  books  in  question,  so  also 
is  the  internal  evidence. 

Books  which  contain  palpable  falsehoods;  abound 
in  ridiculous  and  incredible  stories ;  which  contradict 
the  plain  acknowledged  doctrines  of  the  Bible;  and 
which  can  by  no  means  be  reconciled  with  the  re¬ 
corded  history  of  the  Jews,  cannot  be  a  part  of  the 
sacred  volume.  And  when  the  books  under  con¬ 
sideration  are  tried  by  these  principles,  they  mani¬ 
festly  appear  to  he  apocryphal. 

In  the  book  of  Tobil  an  angel  of  God  is  made  to 
tell  a  downright  falsehood,  by  declaring  that  he  was 
“Azarias  the  son  of  Ananias;”  and  in  the  same 
book,  he  declares,  that  he  was  “  Raphael,  one  of  the 
seven  holy  angels,  which  present  the  prayers  of  the 
saints,  and  go  in  and  out  before  the  glory  of  the 
Holy  One.” 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  263 

Although  Judith  is  celebrated  for  her  devoted 
piety,  and  the  book  under  her  name  was  intended  to 
exhibit  her  as  a  bright  example  of  a  person  wholly 
consecrated  to  God;  yet  she  is  represented  as  speak¬ 
ing  scarcely  any  thing  else  but  falsehoods,  to  Holo- 
fernes ;  but  what  is  still  more  inconsistent,  she  is  made 
to  pray  to  the  God  of  truth,  “  Smite  by  the  deceit  of 
my  lips,  the  servant  with  the  prince,  and  the  prince 
with  the  servant.”  She  also  commends  the  conduct 
of  Simeon  in  the  cruel  slaughter  of  the  Shechemites, 
of  which  God  has  expressed  his  strong  disapproba¬ 
tion  in  various  ways.  Besides  the  objections  to  the 
book  of  Judith,  already  mentioned,  there  is  another 
of  great  weight  arising  from  the  difficulty  of  finding 
any  room  for  such  transactions  and  such  a  state  of 
things  as  are  therein  described,  in  any  period  of  the 
Jewish  history  ;  nor  is  it  easy  to  identify  the  places 
mentioned  in  this  book.  These  difficulties  have  led 
some  of  its  advocates  to  maintain,  that  the  whole  is 
an  allegory,  j and  that  by  bethulia,  we  should  under¬ 
stand  the  Church  of  God,  and  by  Nebuchadnezzar, 
the  enemies  of  the  Church;  and  that  the  victory 
achieved  by  the  courage  and  address  of  Judith,  is 
intended  to  teach  us,  that  the  vhurch’s  deliverance  is 
not  to  be  accomplished  by  human  power,  &c.  This 
perhaps  is  as  favourable  a  view  as  can  be  taken  of 
this  extraordinary  story;  but  no  one  ought  any  long¬ 
er  to  claim  a  place  for  this  book  in  the  sacred  canon. 

In  the  second  book  of  Maccabees,  Razis,  an  elder 
of  Jerusalem,  is  much  commended  for -destroying  his 
own  life,  to  avoid  falling  into  the  hands  of  his  ene¬ 
mies;  but  surely  suicide  has  not  the  approbation  of 
God. 

Between  the  two  books  of  Maccabees  there  are 
irreconcilable  discrepancies;  and  some  statements  re¬ 
specting  JeremialVs  taking  the  ark  and  the  golden 
altar  to  mount  Pisgah,  and  hiding  them  in  a  cave, 
are  manifestly  fabulous. 

The  book  of  Wisdom  is  written  under  the  name 
of  Solomon,  the  son  of  David,  and  he  talks  about  his 
being  appointed  to  build  the  temple  of  the  Lord; 


264  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

whereas  it  has  been  clearly  shown  by  Jerome,  that 
this  book  never  could  have  been  written  by  Solomon 

The  absurd  story  in  Tobit,  of  driving  away  the 
devil  by  the  smoke  of  the  liver  of  a  certain  fish,  and 
of  healing  blindness  by  its  gall,  could  not  have  been 
given  by  divine  inspiration. 

There  are  several  things  in  the  book  of  Baruch,  not 
reconcilable  with  the  sacred  record  y  and  the  account 
given  of  Mardocheus,  in  the  chapters  annexed  to 
Esther,  is  not  consistent  with  what  is  said  of  Mor- 
decai  in  the  genuine  parts  of  that  book;  and  in  this 
apocryphal  writing,  Haman  is  declared  to  be  a  Mace¬ 
donian,  whereas  in  the  canonical  book  of  Esther,  he 
is  .called  an  Agagite;  and  he  is  represented  in  the 
former  to  have  entertained  a  design  of  transferring 
the  kingdom  of  Persia  to  the  Macedonians;  which 
is  utterly  incredible;  for  at  that  time  the  kingdom  of 
Macedon,  if  it  existed,  must  have  been  most  obscure, 
and,  in  all  probability,  unknown  at  the  Persian  court. 

6.  And  finally,  these  books  are  not  canonical,  be¬ 
cause  they  were  not  written  by  prophets,  or  inspired 
men;  but  by  writers  who  speak  of  their  labours  in  a 
way  wholly  incompatible  with  divine  inspiration. 

The  uniform  belief  of  Jews  and  Christians  is,  that 
the  spirit  of  prophecy  ceased  among  the  Jews  after 
the  time  of  Malachi.  He  has,  therefore,  been  de¬ 
nominated  the  seal  of  the  prophets. 

We  know  not  the  author  of  the  books  of  Macca¬ 
bees.  Both  Jerome  and  Eusebius  ascribe  them  to 
Josephus;  but  they  can  scarcely  be  believed  to  have 
the  same  author,  as  they  contradict  one  another.  By 
tne  “  Compiler  of  Jewish  History,”  quoted  by  Dru- 
sius,  these  books  are  placed  after  the  writings  of 
Josephus.  The  second  book  of  Maccabees  is  pro¬ 
fessedly  an  abridgment  of  the  work  of  one  Jason  of 
Cyrene,  in  which,  five  volumes  are  reduced  to  one 
If  the  original  work  of  Jason  was  not  inspired,  neither 
is  this  abridgment. 

The  book  of  Wisdom  is  the  only  one  which  claims 
to  have  been  written  by  an  inspired  man.  But  this 
very  claim  condemns  it ;  for  it  may  be  demonstrated 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


265 


that' it  was  composed  long  after  the  death  of  king 
Solomon.  It  contains  manifest  allusions  to  Grecian 
customs,  and  to  Grecian  philosophy.  The  author 
praises  himself,  and  flatters  the  Jewish  nation,  in  a 
style  entirely  foreign  to  that  of  the  inspired  prophets. 
It  has  been  by  some  ascribed  to  Philo  Judseus;  but 
it  is  more  probably  the  work  of  some  other  Jew.  If 
Solomon  had  written  it,  it  would  have  been  in  the 
Hebrew,  and  always  inserted  in  the  Jewish  canon. 

The  book  of  Ecclesiasticus  is  the  most  valuable 
of  those  denominated  apocryphal,  and  would  have 
the  best  claim,  as  far  as  internal  evidence  is  concern¬ 
ed,  to  a  place  in  the  canon;  but  the  modest  writer 
of  this  book  is  so  far  from  pretending  to  be  inspired, 
that  he  professes  merely  to  have  reduced  to  order  a 
work  of  his  grandfather,  which  he  received  from 
Sirach  his  father.  And  he  entreats  the  reader  to 
peruse  his  work  with  indulgence,  and  to  pardon  him 
if  he  should  be  found  coming  short  in  some  words 
which  he  attempted  to  interpret.  Evidently  the  wri¬ 
ter  was  conscious  of  no  divine  inspiration. 

To  evade  the  force  of  the  above  arguments,  the 
Roman  Catholic  writers  have  invented  a  distinction 
between  primary  and  secondary  canonical  books; 
but  this  is  a  delusive  distinction.  A  book  is  either 
inspired,  or  it  is  not ;  it  belongs  to  the  canon,  or  it 
does  not.  There  is  no  conceivable  medium  in  this 
case..  There  may  be  an  intermediate  class  of  books, 
between  the  canonical  and  spurious;  that  is,  human 
compositions,  which  though  not  inspired,  nor  claim¬ 
ing  a  place  in  the  canon,  may  be  read  with  profit, 
on  account  of  the  history  or  moral  lessons  which  they 
contain.  Some  of  the  fathers  made  this  distinction, 
and  call  these  Ecclesiastical,  in  contradistinction  both 
from  the  canonical  and  supposititious.  Such  books, 
too,  were  read  in  some  churches  in  the  early  ages, 
not  as  of  authority,  but  merely  for  edification ;  and 
thus  they  became  mingled  with  the  canonical  books. 
The  Greek  fathers  were  accustomed  to  use  the  Sep- 
tuagint  version  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  several  of 
these  books,  now  in  question,  being  also  in  Greeks 

23 


266 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY 


became  mixed  with  the  canonical  books,  in.  the  copies 
of  this  version.  The  oldest  Greek  MSS.  of  the  LXX. 
contain  them  intermingled  with  the  other  books,  so 
that  they  must  have  become  so  at  an  early  period. 
But  from  the  testimonies  of  the  fathers,  and  the  cata¬ 
logues  of  canonical  books  which  they  have  left,  these 
books  do  not  appear  to  have  been  included  in  the 
sacred  volume,  in  the  very  earliest  ages  of  the  Chris¬ 
tian  Church.  These  books,  indeed,  were  known  to 
the  fathers ;  but  they  are  careful  to  distinguish  them 
from  the  canonical  books.  And  as  some  of  them 
even  disapproved  of  their  being  read,  and  warned 
their  hearers  against  them,  it  cannot  reasonably  be 
supposed,  that  they  were  then  included  in  the  volume 
of  Holy  Scripture. 

These  books,  called  apocryphal,  may  be  read  with 
profit  by  the  judicious;  but  they  ought  by  no  means 
to  be  placed  on  a  level  with  the  oracles  of  God; 
nor  should  they  be  bound  up  in  the  same  volume 
with  the  canonical  books,  nor  publicly  read  as  a  part 
of  Scripture. 

— — *8&— 


CHAPTER  XIX. 


CANON  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT - METHOD  OF* SETTLING  IT - TESTIMONY 

OF  THE  CHURCH — CONSTITUTION  OF  THE  CANON - WHENCE  THESE  BOOKS 

DERIVE  THEIR  AUTHORITY - SOLICITUDE  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANS  TO  OB¬ 
TAIN  THESE  BOOKS - THEIR  CARE  TO  DISTINGUISH  THEM  FROM  OTHERS 

- AUTOGRAPHS,  &C. 

Three  methods  of  determining  what  books  of  the 
New  Testament  are  canonical,  have  been  adopted 
by  different  persons.  The  first  is  the  authority  of  the 
Church,  that  is,  the  Church  of  Rome,  which  arrogates 
this  authority  to  herself.  The  second  is  internal  evi¬ 
dence,  which  some  have  deemed  sufficient,  without 
the  aid  of  external  testimony.  The  third  is  to  refer 
to  historical  testimony,  as  has  been  done  in  regard  to 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


267 


the  Old  Testament.  Some  distinguished  men  among 
the  Roman  Catholics  have  asserted,  that  the  Scrip¬ 
tures  owe  all  their  authority  to  the  Church;  so  that 
if  she  did  not  give  her  attestation  to  the  gospels,  they 
would  have  no  more  authority  than  iEsop’s  Fables. 
But  when  asked  how  .the  Church  can  establish  her 
authority,  they  muskanswer,  that  it  is  proved  by  the 
testimony  of  the  Scriptures.  This  is  a  perfect  exam¬ 
ple  of  the  sophism  called  “  a  circle,”  for  they  prove 
the  authority  of  the  Scriptures  by  the  Church,  and 
the  authority  of  the  Church  by  the  Scriptures.  Some 
Protestants,  to  avoid  having  recourse  to  the  testimony 
of  the  Ghurch  at  all,  have  verged  to  the  other  extreme, 
and  have  insisted  that  internal  evidence  is  sufficient 
to  enable  us  to  determine  what  books  belong  to  the 
canon.  The  Reformed  Church  of  France  went  so 
far  as  to  make  this  an  article  in  her  public  Confession 
of  Faith.  Now  it  ought  not  to  be  doubted  that  the 
internal  evidence  of  the  Scriptures  is  exceedingly 
strong;  and  that  when  the  mind  of  the  reader  is  truly 
illuminated  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  it  derives  from  this 
source  the  most  unwavering  and  soul-satisfying  evi¬ 
dence  of  their  truth  and  authority ;  but  in  regard  to 
particular  books,  that. every  sincere  Christian  should 
be  able  to  judge  by  this  evidence  alone  whether  they 
are  canonical  or  not,  cannot  be  admitted.  For  exam¬ 
ple,  suppose  the  books  of  Ecclesiasticus  and  of  Eccle¬ 
siastes  were  put  into  the  hands  of  any  plain,  intelli¬ 
gent  man,  i.s  it  probable  that  he  would  be  able  to 
determine  which  of  them  had  a  right  to  a  place  in 
the  canon?  To  adopt  this  principle  would  have  a 
tendency  to  unsettle  the  canon,  and  there  would  be 
f  no.certainty  as  to  the  rule  of  our  faith.  While,  there¬ 
fore,  internal  evidence  ought  not  to  be  rejected,  but 
may  afford  much  light  as  an  auxiliary  source  of  evi¬ 
dence,  our  principal  reliance  must  be  upon  historical 
testimony:  and  it  is  a  matter  of  thankfulness  that  this 
is  so  complete,  as  to  leave  little  more  to  be  desired 
for  the  satisfaction  of  every  impartial  inquirer.  The 
question  to  be  decided  is  a  matter  of  fact.  It  is, 
whether  the  books  which  compose  the  New  Testa- 


.268 


EVIDENCES  OE  CHRISTIANITY. 


ment,  were  written  by  inspired  men ;  that  is,  by  the 
men  whose  names  are  affixed  to  them,  the  apostles 
and  disciples  of  our  Lord,  who  were  eye-witnesses 
of  the  facts  which  they  have  recorded.  And  the 
proper  method  of  deciding  this  question,  is  to  inquire 
whether  there  was  a  general  agreement  among  those 
fathers  who  lived  nearest  to  the  times  of  the  apostles, 
on  this  point;  for  it  can  scarcely  be  supposed,  that 
there  could  be  a  general  error  among  them  in  rfegard 
to  a  point  of  this  kind.  A  general  consent  of  the 
early  fathers,  and  of  the  whole  Christian  Church, 
scattered  all  over  and  beyond  the  Roman  empire, 
furnishes  the  best  evidence  which  the  nature  of  the 
case  admits  of,  and  is  that  species  of  evidence  which 
is  least  liable  to  fallacy.  The  learned  Iiuet  has, 
therefore,  laid  it  down  as  a  rule  on  this  subject, 

“THAT  EVERY  BOOK  IS  GENUINE,  WHICH  WAS  ESTEEM¬ 
ED  GENUINE  BY  THOSE  WHO  LIVED  NEAREST  TO  THE 
TIME  WHEN  IT  WAS  WRITTEN,  AND  BY  THE  AGES 
HOLLOWING,  IN  A  CONTINUED  SERIES.” 

The  reasonableness  and  certainty  of  this  rule  will 
appear  more  evident,  when  it  is  considered,  in  what 
high  esteem  these  books  were  held,  with  what  dili¬ 
gence  they  were  sought  after,  how  constantly  they 
were  publicly  read,  and  how  soon  they  were  quoted, 
and  translated  into  other  languages. 

The  early  Christians  were  neither  careless  nor  cre¬ 
dulous  on  this  subject.  They  pursued  the  only  cer¬ 
tain  method  of  ascertaining  the  facts  in  the  case. 
They  searched  into  the  records  of  the  Churches,  and 
learned  by  the  testimony  of  all,  what  books  had 
been  received  into  the  sacred  volume,  from  the  times 
of  the  apostles;  and  some  of  them  even  travelled 
into  Judea,  to  learn  accurately  all  that  related  to  the 
origin  and  transmission  of  these  sacred  writings. 

The  question  is  often  asked,  when  and  by  what 
authority  was  the  canon'of  the  New  Testament  con¬ 
stituted?  It  seems  to  be  assumed  as  true  in  such  in¬ 
quiries,  that  these  books  could  not  be  of  authority, 
until  sanctioned  by  some  council  or  other  ecclesiasti¬ 
cal  body;  whereas,  they  were  of  authority,  as  far  as 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  269 

known,  from  the  day  of  their  publication.  Their 
right  to  a  place  in  the  canon  does  not  depend  on  the 
vote  of  any  council,  or  the  decision  of  any  bishop, 
but  upon  the  fact  that  they  were  given  by  inspira¬ 
tion;  and  this  is  known  by  the  character  of  the  men 
who  wrote  them.'  The  appeal  to  testimony,  there¬ 
fore,  is  nof  to  obtain  the  judgment  of  the  Church, 
that  these  books  were  canonical ;  but  to  ascertain 
the  fact,  that  they  are  indeed  the  productions  of  the 
apostles,  to  whom  our  Lord  promised  plenary  inspi¬ 
ration.  The  Church  confers  no  authority  on  these 
books.  She  merely  testifies  that  they  were  written 
by  the  persons  to  whom  they  have  been  ascribed. 
And  on  this  point,  we  seek  testimony  not  only  from 
the  fathers  of  the  Church,  but  from  Jews,  Heathen, 
and  Heretics.  Celsus,  Porphyry,  and  Julian,  Manes 
and  Marcion,  are  our  witnesses,  as  well  as  Irenaeus, 
Tertullidn,  Origen,  and  Eusebius.  The  boast  of  the 
Romanists,  therefore,  is  vain,  that  we  are  obliged  to 
depend  on  the  authority  of  the  Church,  for  our  sa¬ 
cred  books.  We  defer  nothing  to  this  authority,  but 
merely  appeal  to  men  of  earning  and  probity  who 
lived  near  the  times,  when  they  were  written,  for 
their  testimony,  as  to  the  source  from  which  they 
were  derived.  That  these  witnesses  were  members 
of  the  Church  is  a  mere  incidental  circumstance.  If 
they  had  held  no  connexion  with  the  Church,  their 
testimony  as  to  the  origin  of  these'  books  would  not 
be  invalidated,  but  rather  strengthened;  we  call  in 
witnesses  from  without  the  Church,  wherever  we 
can  find  them,  and  consider  the  testimony  of  such 
highly  valuable,  because  altogether  unsuspected.  If 
by  the  constitution  of  the  canon,  be  meant,  the  col¬ 
lection  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  into  one 
volume,  it  is  a  question  of  no  importance ;  for  every 
one  of  these  books  had  complete  authority  before 
such  a  volume  was  formed;  and  if  they  had  remained 
separate,  and  never  been  included  in  a  single  volume, 
neither  their  importance  nor  authority  would  have 
been  less.  Indeed,  the  testimony  of  ancient  fathers 
and  manuscripts  would  lead  to  the  conclusion,  that 


2 70  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

in  very  early  times,  the  books  of  the  New  Testamec 
were  not  included  in  one,  but  in  two  volumes;  one 
of  which  was  denominated  gospels  ;  the  other  apos¬ 
tles. 

Whenever  all  the  inspired  books  were  written  and 
published,-  then  was  the  canon  completed,  whether 
any  one  Church  possessed  the  whole  or  only  a  part; 
whether  they  were  bound  in  one  volume  or  two,  or 
remained  each  separate  from  the  rest. 

The  Church  or  individual,  to  whom  any  book  was 
addressed,  or  for  whom  it  was  written,  would  of 
course  enjoy  the  privilege  of  the  first  possession;  but 
as  these  books  were  never  locked  up,  but  freely  com¬ 
municated,  the  nearest  Churches  would  commonly  be 
first  supplied  with  a  copy,  and  thus  the  sacred  books 
would  soon  circulate  through  the  whole  Church. 
Every  Christian  Church  would  be  solicitous  to  ob¬ 
tain,  as  soon  as  possible,  an  authentic  copy  of  every 
writing  known  to  be  the  production  of  an  apostle,  or 
other  inspired  man.  If,  for  example,  they  had  ever 
enjoyed  the  unspeakable  privilege  of  hearing  Paul 
preach,  how  eager  would  they  be  to  read  his  epis¬ 
tles?  And  if  they  had  never  seen  this  “chief  of 
the  apostles,”  their  desire  to  see  his  writings  would 
scarcely  have  been  less. 

It  may  occur  to  some  reader,  that  the  Churches 
might  have  been  imposed  upon  by  writings,  not  the 
genuine  productions  of  the  apostles.  To  guard  against 
every  thing  of  this  kind,  and  to  give  full  assurance 
of  the  genuineness  of  his  epistles,  Paul  was  accus¬ 
tomed  to  commit  them  to  the  custody  of  respectable 
men,  whose  ndmes  he  commonly  mentions  in  the 
epistle.  And  although  he  appears  to  have  employed 
an  amanuensis  in  writing;  yet  he  made  it  a  point  to 
pen  the  concluding  salutation  with  his  own  hand; 
and  this  signature  must  have  been  well  known  among 
all  the  Churches  with  which  he  held  correspondence. 
Accordingly,  we  read  in  the  epistle  to  the  Romans, 
“  I,  Tertius,  wrote  this  epistle.”  And  in  the  first  to 
the  Corinthians,  “  The  salutation  of  me  Paul  with 
mine  own  hand.”  In  that  to  the  Galatians,  “  You 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  271 

sec  how  large  a  letter  I  have  written  to  you  with 
mine  own  hand.”  To  the  Colossians,  “The  saluta¬ 
tion  by  the  hand  of  me  Paul.”  And  to  the  Thessa- 
lonians,  “The  salutation  of  Paul  with  mine  own 
hand,  which  is  the  token  in  every  epistle ;  so  I  write.” 

Thus,  what  at  first  view  appears  to  be  a  mere 
form  of  salutation,  is  found  to  be  an  important  cir¬ 
cumstance  in  giving  authenticity  to  his  epistles;  so 
that  they  could  not  be  successfully  counterfeited. 

It  may  be  inquired,  what  has  become  of  the  auto¬ 
graph  of  these  sacred  books,  and  why  cannot  the 
very  hand-writing  of  Paul,  by  which  his  epistles 
were  authenticated,  be  now  exhibited?  The  answer 
is,  that  no  autograph  of  any  book,  as  old  as  the  New 
Testament,  can  be  produced ;  unless  it  has  been  pre¬ 
served  in.  some  extraordinary  way,  as  is  the  fact  in 
regard  to  numerous  manuscripts  found  in  Hercu¬ 
laneum  ;  very  few  of  which  however  can  be  read. 
The  autographs  of  the  apostles  could  not  have  been 
preserved  to  this  time  without  a  miracle,  and  the 
occasion  did  not  require  such  an  interposition.  And 
primitive  Christians,  although  they  appreciated  the 
truths  contained  in  these  books  above  all  price,  had 
no  great  solicitude  about  the  mere  ink  and  paper. 
A  correct  copy  was  as  good  as  tho  original ;  and 
considering  the  tendency  of  men  to  superstition,  and 
how  every  pretended  relic  of  the  apostles  is  venerated 
and  even  worshipped,  it  seems  to  have  been  a  wise 
ordination  of  Providence,  that  these  autographs  should 
perish. 

How  long  these  originals  continued  in  existence, 
we  have  no  way  of  certainly  knowing,  but  it  is 
thought  by  many,  that  Tertullian  refers  to  them,  as 
extant  in  his  time,  where  he  says,  that  the  authentic 
letters  of  the  apostles  might  be  seen  by  any  that 
would  take  the  pains  to  go  to  the  Churches  to  which 
they  were  addressed.  If  he  had  referred  to  authentic 
copies ,  why  send  the  inquirer  to  the  Churches  to 
which  these  epistles  were  addressed  ?  Were  there  not 
copies  to  be  found  every  where,  in  all  the  Churches, 
as  well  as  these?  And  it  would  be  rather  wonderful 


272 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


if  these  autographs  were  not  in  existence  when  Ter 
tullian  wrote,  who  lived  less  than  a  hundred  years 
after  the  last  of  the  apostles :  and  we  have  now 
manuscripts  of  the  New  Testament,  which  cannot  be 
much  less  than  fourteen  hundred  years  old,  and  are 
perhaps  older.  It  is,  therefore,  a  most  probable  sup¬ 
position,  that  the  Churches  referred  to  had  in  posses¬ 
sion  the  autographs  of  Paul,  when  Tertullian  lived 
and  wrote. 

As  there  is  no  dispute  among  Christians,  of  any 
denomination,  respecting  the  books  which  belong  to 
the  canon  of  the  New  Testament,  it  will  be  unneces¬ 
sary  to  go  into  any  discussion  respecting  the  multi¬ 
tude  of  apocryphal  books,  which  at  a  certain  period, 
were  put  into  circulation  under  the  names  of  the 
apostles  or  companions  of  the  apostles.  Most  of 
these  have  long  since  perished;  and  were,  as  soon  as 
published,  declared  to  be  spurious  by  the  Church, 
almost  with  one  consent.  Such  of  these  spurious 
Gospels,  Acts,  Revelations,  &c.,  as  have  come  down 
to  us,  prove  themselves  to  be  apocryphal;  and  only 
serve  by  contrast,  to  reflect  a  brighter  light  on  the 
genuine  Scriptures. 

The  proof  of  the  canonical  authority  of  the  books 
of  the  New  Testament  may  be  derived  from  the 
catalogues  which  have  been  left  by  the  fathers  and 
councils;  from  express  testimony  of  competent  wit¬ 
nesses;  from  the  fact  that  they  were  read  as  scripture 
in  the  primitive  Churches;  from  the  quotations  made 
from  them,  and  appeals  made  to  them  as  an  authori¬ 
tative  rule  of  faith  and  practice;  and  from  the  early 
versions  of  the  New  Testament. 

1.  Catalogues  of  these  books  which  are  still  extant, 
were  made  out  by  Origen,  Eusebius ,  Athanasius , 
Cyril ,  Epiphanius ,  Gregory  Nazianzen ,  Philas- 
trius,  Jerome ,  Rujin ,  Augustin,  and  by  the  ancient 
author  who  goes  under  the  name  of  Dionysius  the 
Areopagite.  To  these  may  be  added  the  catalogues 
prepared  by  two  councils;  that  of  Laodicea ,  and  that 
of  Carthage.  The  catalogue  found  in  the  book  enti¬ 
tled,  “  Apostolical  Constitutions and  ascribed  to 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  273 

Clement  of  Rome,  and  the  catalogue  of  the  council 
of  Ni.ce,  are  not  referred  to  as  testimony,  because  we 
are  of  opinion,  that  neither  of  these  is  genuine.  But 
we  have  no  need  of  additional  evidence.  We  have 
here  thirteen  catalogues  of  the  books  of  the  New 
Testament,  all  of  which  were  prepared  by  men  the 
most  distinguished,  and  who  had  bestowed  great 
attention  on  this  subject.  Out  of  these  thirteen,  seven 
(a  majority  of  the  whole)  agree  perfectly  with  our 
canon;  and  several  of  the  others  differ  only  by  the 
omission  of  the  book  of  Revelation,  because  it  was 
not  read  in  the  Churches,  and  had  fallen  into  some 
discredit  on  account  of  the  use-  made  of  it  by  the 
Millenarians.  The  catalogue  of  Origen  has  an  omis¬ 
sion  of  James  and  Jude ,  but  this  was  merely  acci¬ 
dental,  for  he  mentions  both  these  epistles  in  his  other 
writings.  The  catalogues  of  Jerome,  Eusebius,  Epi- 
phanius,  Augustin  and  Rufin,  who  of  all  others  were 
the  most  competent  judges  of  this  matter,  are  per¬ 
fectly  the  same  as  our  canon.  That  of  the  council, 
of  Carthage  is  also -the  same;  and  that  of  the  council 
of  Laodicea  differs  only  by  the  omission  of  Revela¬ 
tion ,  the  reason  of  which  has  already  been  assigned, 
2.  These  books  were  constantly  read  as  Scripture 
in  the  Churches.  The  primitive  Christians  imitated 
the  Jews,  in  publicly  reading  the  writings  which  they 
considered  divine  in  their  assemblies.  This  practice 
seems  to  have  been  introduced  as  early  as  the  days 
of  Paul,  who  says  to  the  Colossians,  “  And  when  this 
epistle  is  read  among  you,  cause  that  it  be  read  also 
in  the  Church  of  the  Laodiceans,  u,nd  that  ye  like¬ 
wise  read  the  epistle  from  Laodicea. (Col.  iv.  16.) 
Indeed,  as  PauPs  epistles  were  addressed  to  the  peo¬ 
ple  at  large,  they  could  in  no  way  be  so  conveniently 
communicated  to  those  to  whom  they  were  sent,  as 
by  the  public  reading  of  them,  when  the  Churqfies 
assembled  on  the  first  day  of  the  week.  But  we 
.have  express  testimony  on  this  point.  Justin  Martyr, 
who  lived  in  the  beginning  of  the  second  century, 
says,  “  On  the  day  which  is  called  Sunday,  there  is  a 
meeting  of  all  (Christians)  who  live  either  in  cities  or 


274 


EVIDENCES  OE  CHRISTIANITY. 


country  places;  and  the  memoirs  of  the  apostles  and 
writings  of  the  prophets  are  read.”*  Tertullian  is 
'  equally  explicit ;  for  in  giving  an  account  of  the 
meetings  of  Christians  for  worship,  he  says,  “  They 
assemble  to  read  the  Scriptures  and  offer  up  prayers.” 
And  in  another  place,  among  the  solemn  exercises 
of  the  Lord’s  day,  he  mentions  “reading  the  Scrip¬ 
tures,  singing  psalms,  &c.”t  Cyprian  gives  a  similar 
testimony, f  and  so  does  the  ancient  writer  under  the 
name  of  Dionysius  the  Areopagite,  and  others.  Now 
nothing  can  be  conceived  better  calculated  to  prevent 
deception  by  the  introduction  of  apocryphal  books, 
than  this  practice  of  the  weekly  public  reading  of  the 
Scriptures,  for  by  this  means  the  people  would  know 
what  books  were  of  authority. 

It  is  true,  that  the  writings  of  some  men  who  had 
been  the  companions  of  the  apostles,  were  also  read 
in  the  Churches  for  the  edification  of  the  people; 
particularly  the  epistle  of  Clement  to  the  Corinthians, 
and  the  “  Shepherd”  of  Hermas;  but  the  fathers 
were  careful  to  distinguish  these  from  the  canonical 
Scriptures.  They  were  accustomed  to  call  such  as 
were  written  by  inspired  men  canonical ,  and  the 
writings  of  other  pious  men,  such  as  Clement,  Bar¬ 
nabas,  and  Hermas,  ecclesiastical. 

3.  Another  evidence  in  favour  of  the  canonical 
books  is,  that  they  were  quoted  as  books  of  decisive 
authority  by  the  doctors  of  the  Christian  Church, 
living  in  all  parts  of  the  world.  Now,  this  can  only 
be  accounted  for  by  supposing  that  they  knew  no 
other  books  which  claimed  to  be  canonical;  or  that 
they  with  one  consent  rejected  such  claims,  and  ac¬ 
knowledged  the  books  now  included  in  the  sacred 
volume,  as  the  only  writings  which  were  divinely 
inspired.  The  conclusion  is  clear,  then,  that  those 
books  which  were  alone  cited  as  authority,  to  decide 
questions  respecting  faith  or  duty,  and  which  were 
generally  appealed  to  by  the  early  writers  of  the 
Christian  Church,  are  canonical.  Thus,  the  first 

*  Apol.  II.  n.  93.  t  Cyp.  Ep.  36,  39. 

+  Tertullian  de  Anima. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  2 75 

epistle  of  Peter  is  universally  acknowledged  to  be 
the  production  of  that  apostle,  and  is  cited  as  autho¬ 
rity  by  all  the  fathers;  but  other  books  under  the 
name  of  Peter,  such  as  his  Revelation,  his  Gospel, 
and  his  Acts,  are  never  quoted  as  Scripture  by  any 
of  the  fathers.  This  argument  is  repeatedly  used  by 
Eusebius,  and  other  ancient  defenders  of  the  canon 
of  the  New  Testament;  and  if  the  premises  are  true, 
it  is  perfectly  conclusive. 

Those  persons,  therefore,  such  as  Toland  and  Dod- 
well,  who  have  endeavoured  to  unsettle  oar  present 
canon,  labour  with  all  their  might  to  prove  that  other 
books,  now  considered  apocryphal,  were  as.  com¬ 
monly  cited  by  the  fathers  as  those  which  are  now 
deemed  canonical.  But  learned  men  have  thorough¬ 
ly  examined  this  subject,  and  have  shown  that  this 
is  not  the  fact ;  as  Nye  and  Richardson,  from  an 
examination  of  all  the  passages  in  the  fathers  where 
other  books  are  cited,  have  demonstrated. 

4.  The  early  versions  of  the  New  Testament  fur¬ 
nish  an  additional  argument  in  favour  of  the  canoni¬ 
cal  authority  of  most  of  the  books  now  admitted  into 
the  sacred  volume. 

As  long  as  the  gift  of  tongues  remained  with  the 
ministers  of  the  Church,  the  gospel  could  be  preached 
to  all  the  nations  in  their  own  vernacular  language; 
but  when  miraculous  gifts  ceased,  there  was  a  great 
necessity  that  the  sacred  books  should  be  translated 
into  the  languages  of  those .  people  who  did  not 
understand  Greek,  in  which  the  New  Testament 
was  originally  written.  Therefore  learned  men  early 
applied  themselves  to  this  work;  and  although  we 
have  no  exact  information  of  the  time  when  these 
versions  were  made,  or  the  persons  by  whom  the 
work  was  performed ;  yet  we  have  good  evidence 
that  they  were  made  very  early.  The  Christians  of 
Syria  and  Mesopotamia,  who  were  accustomed  to 
the  use  of  the  Syro-Chaldaic  dialect,  would  not  have 
remained  long  without  a  Syriac  or  Aramean  version 
of  the  New  Testament,  and,  as  many  of  the  learned 
in  these  countries  were  well  acquainted  with  Greek, 


276  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

there  exists  a  strong  probability  that  a  version  into 
Syriac  must  have  been  at  least  begun,  early  in  the 
second  century,  if  not  before  the  close  of  the  first. 
And  the  fact,  that  the  Syriac  version  called  Peshito 
omits  some  of  the  books  which  were  for  awhile 
doubted  of  by  some,  favours  the  opinion  that  this 
version  must  have  been  made  at  a  very  early  period, 
and  probably  in  the  beginning  of  the  second  century. 
Marcion,  the  heretic,  lived  in  this  century,  and  was 
acquainted  with  the  New  Testament;  there  was  then 
a  version  into  Syriac,  his  own  vernacular  tongue 
Without  sucli  a  translation,  a  large  number  of  the 
primitive  churches  must  have  been  entirely  destitute 
of  the  Scriptures. 

The  New  Testament  was  also  early  translated 
into  Latin,  and  from  the  fragments  that  remain,  it 
appears  that  there  were  several  versions  into  this 
language,  which  were  in  use,  when  the  Latin  lan¬ 
guage  prevailed;  and  especially  in  Italy.  One  of 
these  is  called  by  Augustine,  Itala ,  and  was  the  vul- 
gate,  before  Jerome  undertook  a  translation;  but  it 
was  not  long  before  versions  were  made  into  various 
other  languages,  as  the  Coptic,  Ethiopic,  Arabic,  Ar¬ 
menian,  &c.  Now  all  these  contain  all  the  books 
which  are  now  included  in  our  canon,  except  the 
Syriac,  which  is  probably  the  oldest  of  them  all. 
The  books  omitted  in  this  version  are  the  Revela¬ 
tion,  and  some  of  the  minor  epistles  which  were  not 
generally  known  when  this  version  was  made.  As 
it  relates  to  all  the  other  books  of  the  New  Testa¬ 
ment,  this  version  furnishes  a  satisfactory  proof  of 
their  canonical  authority.  J.  D.  Michaelis  is  of  opin¬ 
ion,  that  this  is  the  best  translation  of  the  New  Tes¬ 
tament  ever  made,  and  that  it  is  referred  to  by  Meli- 
to,  bishop  of  Sardis.  In  the  time  of  Jerome,  the 
Scriptures  were  read  in  Syriac  in  all  the  Churches  in 
that  country,  and  in  Mesopotamia. 

When  the  council  of  Nice  met,  and  other  general 
councils,  there  was  never  any  dispute  among  the 
venerable  bishops  who  attended,  about  the  canon  of 
Scripture.  In  regard  to  this  there  seems  to  have 
been  a  perfect  agreement.  The  only  persons  who 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY.  277 

impugned  the  commonly  received  books  were  here¬ 
tics;  and  even  from  the  testimony  of  these,  much 
evidence  may  be  derived  in  favour  of  our  canon. 
The  Arians  and  Pelagians  appealed  to  the  same 
Scriptures  as  the  orthodox  Church.  It  was  impossi¬ 
ble,  after  the  Church  was  widely  extended,  and  the 
New  Testament  translated  into  divers  tongues,  that 
any  book  could  have  been  added  to  the  sacred  vol¬ 
ume,  or  abstracted  from  it.  Such  an  attempt,  if  it 
could  have  proved  successful  in  a  single  Church, 
never  could  have  prevailed  to  any  extent.  Detection 
of  such  a  fraudulent  attempt  -would  have  been  cer¬ 
tain  and  immediate.  We  have,  therefore,  the  utmost 
certainty,  that  we  now  possess  the  identical  Scrip¬ 
tures  which  were  given  to  the  Churches  by  the  apos¬ 
tles  and  other  inspired  men.  The  learned  John 
David  Michaelis  has  very  needlessly  stirred  a  ques¬ 
tion  concerning  the  canonical  authority  of  the  writ¬ 
ings  of  Mark  and  Luke,  because  they  only  of  the 
writers  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  were  not 
numbered  among  the  apostles.  But  the  ancient 
Church  never  entertained  any  doubt  on  this  subject, 
and  received  their  gospels  with  the  same  confidence 
and  veneration  as  the  others.  Indeed,  they  seem  to 
have  esteemed  the  gospel  of  Luke  just  as  if  it  had 
been  dictated  by  Paul,  afid  that  of  Mark  as  if  dictat¬ 
ed  by  Peter.  And  when  we  look  into  these  gospels, 
we  find  no  more  evidence  of  human  weakness  or 
error,  than  in  those  written  by  Matthew  and  John. 
And  we  feel  no  hesitation  in ‘applying  to  this  case  the 
rule  already  mentioned,  that  books  universally  receiv¬ 
ed  as  inspired  by  those  who  lived  nearest  to  the  times 
when  they  were  published,  ought  to  be  considered 
canonical  by  us.  And  according  to  this  rule,  these 
gospels  have  as  good  a  claim  to  a  place  in  the  canon 
as  any  books  in  the  volume. 

It  will,  we  presume,  be  satisfactory  to  the  reader 
to  have  some  of  the  testimonies  of  the  Christian 
fathers  in  regard  to  each  book,  or  each  class  of  books 
set  before  him.  This  will  be  the  subject  of  the  next 
chapter. 


24 


§78 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY 


CHAPTER  XX. 


TESTIMONIES  IN  FAVOUR  OF  THE  CANONICAL  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  ROOKS 

OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


Although  the  precise  time  when  these  hooks  were 
written  is  unknown,  it  has  generally  been  believed, 
that  Matthew’s  gospel  is  among  the  earliest.  The 
uniform  testimony  of  the  fathers  is,  that  Matthew 
wrote  in  Hebrew;  that  is,  in  the  vernacular  language 
of  Judea.  To  this  opinion,  modern  critics  have  made 
serious  objections.  They  allege,  that  there  is  no  clear 
evidence  of  the  existence  of  the  Hebrew  codex;  that 
the  work  has  no  internal  evidence  of  being  a  transla¬ 
tion;  and  that  this  opinion  tends  to  destroy  our  idea 
of  the  integrity  of  the  sacred  canon;  for,  according  to 
it,  one  inspired  work  which  belonged  to  the  canon  is 
lost,  and  its  place  supplied  by  a  translation,  made 
nobody  knows  by  whom.  For  these,  and  such  like 
reasons,  a  large  number  of  bur  ablest  critics  have 
declared  in  favour  of  a  Greek  original.  But  as  a 
mere  argument  cannot  stand  against  a  body  of  com¬ 
bined  testimony,  the  opinion  of  a  Hebrew  original  is 
likely  to  maintain  its  ground,  especially  as  numbers 
among  its  advocates  are  men  as  learned  and  saga¬ 
cious  as  those  who  appear  on  the  other  side.  To 
reconcile  these  discordant  opinions,  an  ingenious  and 
plausible  theory  has  been  invented,  which  is,  that 
Matthew  first  prepared  his  gospel  for  the  Jewish 
converts;  but  others  who  did  not  understand  the 
Hebrew,  naturally  wishing  for  an  authentic  account 
of  the  life  of  our  Lord  from  the  pen  of  an  apostle, 
prevailed  with  him  before  he  left  Judea,  to  put  it  into 
Greek;  or  to  cause  it  to  be  translated  under  his  own 
eye.  The  Hebrew  copy  being  only  in  possession  of 
the  Ebionites  and  Nazarenes,  was  soon  corrupted, 
and  finally  lost,  when  no  Church  of  Hebrew  Chris¬ 
tians  any  longer  existed.  Thus  they  reconcile  the 
testimony  of  the  ancients  with  the  opinion  that  the 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY.  279 

Greek  text  is  truly  inspired,  and  therefore,  a  part  of 
the  sacred  canon.  There  is  much  internal  probability 
in  this  theory,  and  all  it  wants  to  commend  it  fully 
to  our  acceptance  is  the  want  of  external  testimony. 
But  let  us  hear  what  the  fathers  say  respecting  Mat¬ 
thew  as  an  Evangelist. 

Papias,  bishop  of  Hierapolis,  who  had  seen  and 
conversed  with  the  apostle  John,  mentions  Matthew’s 
gospel,  and  says,  “  he  wrote  the  divine  oracles  in 
Hebrew.”*  We  learn  from  this  in  what  esteem  the 
writings  of  apostles  were  held  in  the  very  earliest 
times.  Matthew’s  gospel  is  here  denominated  the 
divine  oracles ,  by  a  man  who  was  contemporary 
with  John,  and  who,  no  doubt,  spoke  the  sentiments 
of  the  Church,  in  that  day. 

Irenasus,  bishop  of  Lyons,  who  was  acquainted 
with  Polycarp  the  disciple  of  John,  says,  “  Matthew, 
then  among  the  Jews,  wrote  a  gospel  in  their  lan¬ 
guage,  while  Peter  and  Paul  were  preaching  at 
Rome.”t  In  another  place,  he  says,  “  The  gospel  of 
Matthew  was  delivered  to  the  Jews.”f  Origen  says, 
“  According  to  the  traditions  received  by  me,  the  first 
gospel  Was  writtens  by  Matthew,  once  a  publican, 
afterwards  a  disciple  of  Jesus  Christ,  who  delivered 
it  to  the  Jewish  believers,  composed  in  their  own 
language.”§  Origen  flourished  about  a  hundred  years 
after  the  death  of  John,  lived  most  of  his  life  near  to 
Judea,  and  was  thoroughly  versed  in  biblical  learning. 

Eusebius  may  be  placed  a  century  after  Origen. 
No  man  had  taken  more  pains  to  search  into  ecclesi¬ 
astical  antiquities.  He  gives  the  following  testimony, 
“  Matthew  having  first  preached  the  gospel  to  the 
Hebrews,,  when  about  to  go  to  other  people,  delivered 
to  them  in  their  own  language,  the  gospel  written  by 
himself.”  || 

Thus,  in  the  Synopsis  ascribed  to  Athanasius,  it  is 
said,  “Matthew  wrote  his  gospel  in  Hebrew,  and 
published  it  at  Jerusaleni.”1[ 

*  Lardner,  Vol.  III.  p.  160.  §  Lardner,  Vol.  III.  p.  160. 

t  Adv.  Haer.  L.  III.  c.  1.  ||  Ibid.  « 

t  Euseb.  L.  V.  c.  8.  ^  Ibid.  p.  150. 


280 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


Cyril  of  Jerusalem  also  testifies,  “  that  Matthew 
wrote  in  Hebrew.”  Epiphanius,  Gregory  Nazianzen, 
and  Ebedjesu,  say  the  same. 

Jerome,  in  his  commentary  on  this  gospel,  says, 
“  Matthew  the  publican,  surnamed  Levi,  wrote  his 
gospel  in  Judea,  in  the  Hebrew  language.”* 

Concerning  the  time  when  this  gospel  was  pub¬ 
lished,  there  are  several  opinions;  some  placing  it 
eight  years  after  the  ascension  of  our  Lord;  others 
bringing  it  down  to  the  fifteenth  year ;  and  some  so 
low  as  the  year  of  our  Lord  sixty-four.  While,  on 
the  other  hand,  some  late  critics  carry  it  up  to  the 
third  or  fourth  year  after  the  ascension. 

The  gospel  of  Mark  is  also  noticed  by  Papias,  in  a 
passage  which  has  been  preserved  by  Eusebius.  He 
says,  “  that  when  Peter  had  come  to  Rome,  they 
were  so  inflamed  with  love  for  the  truths  of  Chris¬ 
tianity,  that  they  entreated  Mark  the  companion  of 
Peter,  and  whose  gospel  we  now  have,  praying  him 
that  he  would  write  down  for  them  and  leave  with 
them  an  account  of  the  doctrines  which  had  been 
preached  to  them;  and  they  did  not  desist  from  their 
request,  until  they  had  prevailed  on  him,  and  pro¬ 
cured  his  writing  that  which  is  now  the  gospel  of 
Mark.  That  when  Peter  came  to  know  this,  he  was 
by  the  direction  of  the  Holy  Spirit  pleased  with  the 
request  of  the  people,  and  confirmed  the  gospel  which 
was  written  for  the  use  of  the  Churches.”!  Accord¬ 
ing  to  this  testimony  of  an  apostolical  father,  the 
gospel  of  Mark  received  the  sanction  of  Peter,  and  is 
as  apostolic  as  if  this  apostle  had  written  it  with  his 
own  hand.  And  as  it  was  nothing  else  than  the  sub¬ 
stance  of  Peter’s  preaching,  it  is  all  one  as  if  he  had 
dictated  it  to  an  amanuensis.  •  • 

Irenmus,  however,  states  the  matter  a  little  differ¬ 
ently,  in  some  respects.  He  says,  “After  their  death 
(Peter  and  Paul,)  Mark,  also  the  disciple  of  Peter, 
delivered  to  us  the  things  which  had  been  preached 
by  Peter.”J 

*  See  Lard.  Vol,  III.  p.  160.  t  Lard.  Vol.  III.  p.  177 

+  Ibid,  p  177. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


28 1 


Augustine  called  Mark  “the  abridger  of  Matthew,” 
on  account  of  his  relating  things  so  much  in  the  same 
style  as  that  apostle;  but  this  gospel  is  not  properly 
an  abridgment,  for  in  some  things  he  is  more  minute, 
and  enlarges  more  than  Matthew ;  and  he  has  many 
particulars  not  recorded  by  Matthew. 

The  testimony  of  Clement  of  Alexandria  is -much 
to  the  same  purpose  as  what  has  already  been  stated; 
which  shows  that  a  uniform  tradition  existed  in  rela¬ 
tion  to  this  matter.  He  says,  “when  Peter  was  pub¬ 
licly  preaching  the  gospel  at  Rome,  by  the  influence 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  many  of  the  converts  desired 
Mark,  as  having  been  long  a  companion  of  Peter, 
and  who  well  remembered  what  he  preached,  to 
write  down  his  discourses.  That  upon  this  he  com¬ 
posed  his  gospel,  and  gave  it  to  those  who  made  this 
request,  which  when  Peter  knew,  he  neither  encour¬ 
aged  nor  obstructed  the  work.”* 

Tertullian  informs  us,  “  that  the  gospel  published, 
by  Mark  may  be  reckoned  Peter’s,  whose  interpreter 
he  was.”t  And  Origen  concurs  in  the  uniform  testi¬ 
mony;  “Mark,”  says  he,  “wrote  his  gospel  accord¬ 
ing  to  the  dictates  of  Peter.”  And  Jerome  also  tells 
us,-“  that  Mark,  the  disciple  of  Peter,  wrote  a  short 
gospel,  from  what  he  had  heard  from  Peter,  at  the 
request  of  the  brethren  at  Rome,  which  when  Peter 
knew,  he  approved  and  published  it  in  our  Churches, 
commanding  the  reading  of  it  by  his  own  authori¬ 
ty,”  f  which  exactly  agrees  with  what  was  cited  from 
Papias.  We  see  how  full  are  the  testimonies  in 
favour  of  this  gospel;  and  accordingly,  we  never 
hear  in  all  antiquity  of  any  doubt  or  scruple  respect¬ 
ing  its  canonical  authority. 

The  only  information  that  can  be  depended  on 
respecting  the  time  when  this  gospel  was  published, 
is,  that  in  the  testimonies  cited  above,  it  is  said,  that 
it  was  written  after  Peter  came  and  preached  at 
Rome;  and  one  witness  says,  after  his  death.  We 
have,  it  is  true,  something  said  on  this  subject  by 

*  Euseb.  Ecc.  Hist.  Lib.  VI.  c.  4. 

t  Lard.  Vol.  III.  p.  178. 


t  Lard,  Vol.  III.  p.  178. 


282 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


writers  who  lived  in  the  middle  ages,  but  their  testi¬ 
mony  is  of  little  worth  on  such  a  subject.  And  one 
of  these  writers  asserts,  that  Mark  wrote  his  gospel 
at  Rome,  and  in  the  Roman  language;  for  which 
opinion  there  is  no  ancient  authority.  It  was  no 
doubt  written,  like  the  other  hooks  of  the  New  Tes- 
tamewt,  in  Greek. 

Luke  the  penman  of  the  third  gospel,  was  selected 
by  the  Churches  to  travel  with  Paul,  and  was  his  com¬ 
panion  during  his  confinement  at  Rome.  Concern¬ 
ing  this  evangelist,  Irenseus  also  speaks  in  the  same 
passage  in  which  he  mentions  Mark,  saying,  “  that 
Luke,  the  companion  of  Paul,  put  down  in  a  book 
the  gospel  preached  by  him.”  In  another  place,  he 
says,  “  Luke  was  not  only  a  companion  but  a  fellow- 
labourer  of  the  apostles,  especially  of  Paul.”  “  The 
apostles,”  says  he,  “  envying,  none,  plainly  delivered 
to  all,  the  things  which  they  had  heard  from  the 
Lord;  so  likewise  Luke,  envying  no  man,  has  de¬ 
livered  to  us  what  he  learned  from  them,  as  he  says, 
“  even  as  they  declared  them  unto  us,  from  the  be¬ 
ginning,  who  were  eye-witnesses  and  ministers  of  his 
word.”*  Eusebius  informs  us,  that  Clement  of 
Alexandria,  in  a  work  not  now  extant,  bore  ample 
testimony  to  the  gospel  of  Luke,  as  well  as  to  the 
other  gospels.  And  he  mentions  a  tradition  which 
he  had  received  from  more  ancient  presbyters,  “  that 
the  gospels  with  genealogies  were  first  written.” 
Tertullian  speaks  of  Mark  and  Luke  as  “  disciples  of 
the  apostles,”  but  he  ascribes  the  same  authority  to 
the  gospels  written  by  them,  as  to  others.  “  Luke’s 
Digest,”  says  he,  “  is  often  ascribed  to  Paul.”  And 
Origen,  in  speaking  of  the  four  gospels,  says,  “  The 
third  is  that  according  to  Luke,  the  gospel  commend¬ 
ed  by  Paul,  published  for  the  sake  of  the  Gentile 
converts.”! 

The  testimony  of  Eusebius  to  Luke’s  gospel  is 
very  full.  He  says,  “  Luke,  who  was  of  Antioch, 
and  by  profession  a  physician,  for  the  most  part  a 
companion  of  Paul,  who  had  likewise  more  than  a 

*  Lard.  Vol.  III.  p.  198.  t  Lard.  Vol,  III.  p.  198. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  283 

slight  acquaintance  with  the  other  apostles,  has  left 
us,  in  two  books  divinely  inspired,  evidences  of  the 
art  of  healing  souls,  which  lie  had  learned  from 
them.  One  of  them  is  the  gospel  which  he  profes- 
seth  to  have  written  as  they  delivered  it  to  him  who 
were  eye-witnesses  and  ministers  of  the  word,  with 
all  of  whom  he  had  been  perfectly  acquainted  from 
the  first. ”*  And  in  another  place,  he  says,  “Luke 
hath  delivered  in  his  gospel  a  certain  account  of  such 
things  as  he  had  been  assured  of  by  his  intimate  ac¬ 
quaintance  and  familiarity  with  Paul,  and  his  con¬ 
versation  with  the  other  apostles.”  In  the  Synopsis 
ascribed  to  Athanasius,  it  is  said,  “that  the  gospel 
of  Luke  was  dictated  by  the  apostle  Paul,  and  writ 
ten  and  published  by  the  blessed  apostle  and  phy 
sician  Luke.”  To  -these  testimonies  it  will  be  unne 
cessary  to  add  any  others,  except  that  of  Jerome, 
which  is  as  follows:  “Luke,  who  was  of  Antioch, 
and  by  profession  a  physician,  not  unskilful  in  the 
Greek  language,  a  disciple  of  the  apostle  Paul,  and 
the  constant  companion  of  his  travels,  wrote  a  gos¬ 
pel,  and  another  excellent  volume,  entitled  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles.”  It  is  supposed  that  Luke  did  not 
learn  his  gospel  from  the  apostle  Paul  only,  who  had 
not  conversed  with  the  Lord  in  the  flesh,  but  also 
from  other  apostles,  which  likewise  he  owns  at  the 
beginning  of  his  volume,  saying,  “Even  as  they  de¬ 
livered  them  unto  us,  who  from  the  beginning  were 
eye-witnesses  and  ministers  of  the  word.”t 

In  another  place,  he  says,  “the  third  evangelist  is 
Luke,  the  physician,  a  Syrian  of  Antioch,  who  was 
a  disciple  of  the  apostle  Paul,  and  published  his  gos¬ 
pel  in  the  countries  of  Achaia  and  Bosotia.” 

This  gospel  has  from  the  time  of  its  publication, 
been  received  as  canonical  by  the  whole  Christian 
Church;  has  been  constantly  read  in  the  Churches 
as  a  part  of  divinely  inspired  Scripture;  has  been 
cited  as  authority  by  all  Christian  writers;  and  has 
a  place  in  every  catalogue  of  the  books  of  the  New 
Testament  which  was  ever  published.  Its  canonical 

*  Lard.  Vol.  III.  p.  198.  t  Ibid.  Vol.  III.  p.  200. 


284  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

authority  is  therefore  placed  beyond  the  reach  of  rea¬ 
sonable  doubt,  notwithstanding  the  injudicious  scru¬ 
ples  which  some  learned  moderns  have  entertained 
and  published  to  the  world  respecting  it.* 

The  fourth  and  last  of  the  gospels  was  written  by 
John,  the  beloved  disciple.  This  evangelist,  accord¬ 
ing  to  the  universal  testimony  of  the  ancients,  sur¬ 
vived  all  the  other  apostles,  and  did  not  leave  the 
world  until  about  the  close  of  the  first  century  of  the 
Christian  era.  The  testimonies  to  the  genuineness 
and  canonical  authority  of  this  gospel  are  as  full  as 
could  be  desired. 

Iren  ecus  asserts,  “  that  the  evangelist  John  designed 
by  his  gospel  to  confute  the  errors  which  Cerinthus 
had  infused  into  the  minds  of  the  people,  and  which 
had  been  infused  by  those  called  Nicolaitanes;  and 
to  convince  them  that  there  was  one  God  who  had 
made  all  things  by  his  word,  and  not  as  they  ima¬ 
gined,  one  who  was  the  Son  of  the  Creator,  and  an¬ 
other  the  Christ  who  was  impassible  and  descended 
upon  Jesus  the  Son  of  the  Creator.”!  Jerome  fully 
confirms  this  testimony  of  Irenseus.  He  says,  “  that 
when  John  was  in  Asia,  there  arose  the  heresies  of 
Ebion  and  Cerinthus,  and  others  who  denied  that 
Christ  had  come  in  the  flesh,  that  is,  denied  his  divine 
nature;  whom  he  in  his  epistle  calls  antichrist,  and 
whom  Paul  frequently  condemns  in  his  epistles.  He 
was  forced  by  almost  all  the  bishops  of  Asia,  and  the 
deputations  of  many  other  Churches  to  write  more 
plainly  concerning  the  divinity  of  our  Saviour;  and 
to  soar  aloft  in  a  discourse  concerning  the  word,  not 
more  bold  than  felicitous.”  “  It  is  related  in  Eccle¬ 
siastical  history,  that  John,  when  solicited  by  the 
brethren  to  write,  answered,  that  he  would  not  do  it 
unless  a  day  of  public  prayer  and  fasting  was  ap¬ 
pointed  to  implore  the  assistance  of  God:  which  being 
done,  and  the  solemnity  being  honoured  with  a  satis¬ 
factory  revelation  from  God,  he  broke  forth  in  the 

*  See  a  discussion  respecting  the  inspiration  of  the  gospels  of 
Mark  and  Luke,  in  my  work  on  the  Canon. 

t  Lard.  Vol.  III.  p.  227. 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY.  285 

words  with  which  his  gospel  commences,  in  the 

BEGINNING  WAS  THE  WORD,”  &C.* 

The  same  learned  father,  in  his  book  of  “  Illustri¬ 
ous  Men,”  says,  “  John  wrote  a  gospel  at  the  request 
of  the  bishops  of  Asia,  against  Cerinthus  and  other 
heretics,  and  especially  against  the  doctrine  of  the 
Ebionites  then  springing  up,' who  say  that  Christ  did 
not  exist  before  his  birth  of  Mary;  for  which  reason 
he  was  obliged  to  declare  his  divine  nativity.  An¬ 
other  reason  of  his  writing  is  also  mentioned,  which 
is,  that  having  read  the  volumes  of  Matthew,  Mark, 
and  Luke,  he  expressed  his  approbation  of  their  his¬ 
tory  as  true ;  but  observed,  that  they  had  recorded  an 
account  of  but  one  year  of  our  Lord’s  ministry,  even 
the  next  after  the  imprisonment  of  John  [the  Bap¬ 
tist,]  in  which  also  he  suffered.  Omitting,  therefore, 
that  year,s  (for  the  most  part,)  the  history  of  which 
had  been  written  by  the  other  three,  he  related  the 
acts  of  the  preceding  time  before  John  was  shut  up 
in  prison,  as  may  appear  to  those  who  read  the  four 
evangelists;  which  may  serve  to  account  for  the 
seeming  difference  between  John  and  the  rest.”! 

This  ample  testimony  of  Jerome  is  confirmed  by 
Augustine,  who  says,  “  that  this  evangelist  wrote 
concerning  the  s  co-eternal  divinity  of  Christ,  against 
heretics.”]: 

Lampe,  Lardner,  and  Titmann,  have  called  in 
question  this  account  of  the  occasion  of  John’s  wri¬ 
ting;  but  the  plausible  reasonings  of  ingenious  men 
have  little  weight,  when  laid  in  the  balance  with  the 
positive  testimony  of  such  men  as  those  who  have 
asserted  the  contrary.  Whether  this  gospel  was  writ¬ 
ten  before  or  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  is  a 
matter  of  dispute  among  the  learned;  but  the  opinion 
of  the  ancients,  and  most  of  the  moderns  is,  that  it 
was  written  afterwards;  and  with  this,  the  internal 
evidence  best  agrees. 

The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  was  undoubtedly  written 
by  Luke,  for  it  is  dedicated  to  Theophilus,  the  same 

*  Lard.  Vol,  III.  p.  229.  t  Ibid.  p.  228. 

t  Ibid. 


286 


EVIDENCES  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 


excellent  person  to  whom  he  had  dedicated  his  gos¬ 
pel,  and  in  this  last  dedication  he  refers  to  his  former 
work.  The  fact  is  also  confirmed  by  the  testimony 
of  the  whole  Christian  Church,  no  one  having  ever 
called  it  in  question. 

This  book  was  in  great  esteem  among  the  early 
fathers,  and  is  often  mentioned  in  their  writings,  and 
always  quoted  as  a  part  of  inspired  Scripture. 

Irenseus  says,  “  Luke’s  Acts  of  the  Apostles  ought 
to  be  equally  received  with  the  gospel.”  “  In  them 
he  has  carefully  delivered  to  us  the  truth ,  and  given 
us  a  sure  rule  for  salvation.”  So  also,  Clement  of 
Alexandria, Ter tullian,  Origen,  Eusebius,  and  Jerome, 
all  ascribe  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  to  Luke.* 

In  the  Syriac  version  of  the  New  Testament,  the 
name  of  Luke  is  prefixed  to  this  book;  the  same  is 
also  said  to  be  the  fact  in  some  very  ancient  manu¬ 
scripts. 

It  must  have  been  early  circulated  among  the 
Churches,  for  it  is  plainly  referred  to  by  Clement  of 
Rome,  the  fellow-labourer  of  Paul.  And  Polycarp, 
in  his  epistle  to  the  Philippians,  has  cited  a  passage 
from  the  Acts;  as  also  Justin  Martyr,  in  his  “  Exhor¬ 
tation  to  the  Greeks.”  It  is  distinctly  cited  by  Ire- 
na3us  more  than  thirty  times,  and  is  expressly  de¬ 
nominated  Scripture,  which  is  also  true  of  Tertul- 
lian. 

The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  being  found  in  all  the 
catalogues  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  hav¬ 
ing  always  been  read  in  the  Churches,  uniformly 
quoted  as  Scripture,  and  possessing  all  the  internal 
evidences  of  inspiration,  as  well  as  the  express  testi¬ 
mony  of  the  early  fathers,  has  an  undoubted  right  to 
a  place  in  the  sacred  canon. 

*  See  Lardner,  Vol.  III.  p.  207. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


2  87 


CHAPTER  XXI. 

CANONICAL  AUTHORITY  OF  PAUL’S  EPISTLES. 

The  fourteen  epistles  of  Paul  constitute  a  very  large 
and  very  important  part  of  the  canon  of  the  New 
Testament,  and  the  evidence  of  their  canonical  autho¬ 
rity  is  complete.  Indeed,  no  question  has  ever  been 
agitated  respecting  the  divine  authority  of  any  one 
of  them;  but  as  his  name  is  prefixed  to  all,  except 
the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  it  has  been  doubted 
whether  indeed  it  was  written  by  Paul.  After  a 
thorough  investigation,  however,  the  Church,  both  in 
the  east  and  west,  settled  ddwn  in  the  full  belief  that 
this  apostle  was  the  writer. 

Clement  of  Rome,  in  an  epistle  to  the  Corinthians, 
refers  expressly  to  one  of  Paul’s  epistles  to  the  same 
people.  “  Take,”  says  he,  “  into  your  hands,  the 
epistle  of  blessed  Paul  the  apostle.  What  did  he  at 
first  write  to  you  in  the  beginning  of  the  gospel  ? 
Verily  he  did  by  the  Spirit  admonish  you  concerning 
himself,  Cephas,  and  Apollos,  because  that  even  then 
ye  did  form  parties.”*  There  are,  in  the  epistle  of 
Clement,  several  other  passages  cited  from  Paul,  but 
this  is  the  only  one  where  his  name  is  mentioned. 

Hermas  and  Ignatius  also  cite  words  from  Paul’s 
epistles,  but  without  designating  the  book  from  which 
they  are  taken.  And  Polycarp,  the  martyr,  and  dis¬ 
ciple  of  John,  when  condemned  to  death,  wrote  an 
epistle  to  the  Philippians,  in  which  he  makes  express 
mention  of  Paul’s  first  epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  and 
cites  the  apostle’s  words :  “  Do  ye  not  know  that  the 
saints  shall  judge  the  world ?t  as  Paul  teaches.”  This 
venerable  and  apostolical  father,  in  the  same  epistle, 
quotes  a  passage  from  Paul’s  epistle  to  the  Ephesians 
as  Scripture.  “  For  I  trust,”  says  he,  “  that  ye  are 
well  exercised  in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  as  in  these 
*  Epist.  Clem.  Rom.  ad  Cor.  f  1  Cor.  vi.  2. 


288 


EVIDENCES  OF  CIIEISTIANITV. 


Scriptures  it  is  said,  4  Be  ye  angry  and  sin  not ;  let 
not  the  sun  go  down  upon  your  wrath.’  ”*  He  also 
cites  passages  from  the  second  epistle  to  the  Corin¬ 
thians,  from  the  epistle  to  the  Galatians,  from  the  first 
and  second  to  the  Thessalonians,  from  the  epistle  to 
the  Hebrews,  and  from  both  of  Paul’s  epistles  to 
Timothy.  But  as  was  customary  at  that  time,  he 
does  not  refer  to  the  book  from  which  his  citation  in 
any  particular  instance  is  made. 

Justin  Martyr  quotes  many  texts  from  Paul’s  epis¬ 
tles,  and  in  the  very  words  of  the  apostle,  but  does 
not  mention  his  name,  or  the  title  of  the  epistle  from 
which  he  makes  his  citations.  Irenaeus  quotes  pas¬ 
sages  from  all  the  epistles  of  Paul,  except  the  short 
letter  to  Philemon.  It  would  fill  too  much  space  to 
put  down  all  the  texts  cited  by  this  father.  Let  the 
following  sufficed  44  This  same  thing  Paul  has  ex¬ 
plained,  writing  to  the  Romans,  4  Paul,  an  apostle  of 
Jesus  Christ,  separated  to  the  Gospel  of  God.’f  Again 
writing  to  the  Romans,  he  says,  4  Whose  are  the 
fathers,  and  of  whom  concerning  the  flesh  Christ 
came,  who  is  God  over  all  blessed  for  evermore.’§ 
This  also  Paul  manifestly  proves  in  his  epistle  to  the 
Corinthians,  saying,  4  Moreover,  brethren,  I  would 
not  that  ye  should  be  ignorant  how  that  all  our  fathers 
were  under  the  cloud.’  ||  Paul,  in  his  second  epistle 
to  the  Corinthians,  says,  4  In  whom  the  god  of  this 
world  hath  blinded  the  eyes  of  them  that  believe 
not.’ IF  The  Apostle  Paul  says,  in  his  epistle  to  the 
Galatians, 4  Wherefore  then  serveth  the  law  of  works? 
it  was  added  until  the  seed  should  come  to  whom  the 
promise  was  made.’**  As  also  blessed  Paul  says  in 
his  epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  4  For  we  are  members 
of  his  body,  of  his  flesh,  and  of  his  bones.’tt  As  also 
Paul  says  to  the  Philippians,  4 1  am  full,  having  re¬ 
ceived  of  Epaphroditus  the  things  which  were  sent 
from  you,  an  odour  of  a  sweet  smell,  a  sacrifice 
acceptable,  well  pleasing  unto  God. ’iff  Again,  Paul 

*  Ephes.  iv.  26.  §  Rom.  ix.  5. 

t  Iren.  adv.  Haeret.  ||  1  Cor.  x.  1. 

t  Rom.  i.  1.  If  2  Cor.  iv.  4. 


**  Gal.  iii.  19. 
ft  Ephes.  v.  30. 
It  Phil.  iv.  13. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


289 


says,  in  his  epistle  to  the  Colossians,  ‘Luke,  the 
beloved  physician,  salute th  you.’* * * §  The  apostle,  in 
the  first  epistle  to  the  Thessalonians,  says,  ‘  And  the 
God  of  peace  sanctify  you  wholly.’t  And  again 
in  the  second  epistle  to  the  Thessalonians,  speaking 
of  antichrist,  says,  ‘  And  then  shall  that  wicked 
one  be  revealed.’  ”f  In  the  beginning  of  his  work 
against  heresies,  he  says,  “  Whereas  some  having  re¬ 
jected  the  truth,  bring  in  lying  words,  and  ‘vain 
genealogies  rather  than  godly  edifying,  which  is  in 
faith,  as  saith  the  apostle.’  ”§  The  first  epistle  to 
Timothy  is  very  often  quoted  in  the  above  work. 
When  speaking  of  Linus,  he  says,  “  Of  this  Linus 
Paul  makes  mention  in  his  epistle  to  Timothy,  ‘  Eu- 
bulus  greeteth  thee,  and  Pudens,  and  Linus.’ ||  As 
Paul  says,  ‘  A  man  that  is  a  heretic,  after  the  first 
and  second  admonition  reject.’  ”1 [ 

Thus  Irenceus,  who  lived  in  the  age  next  after  that 
of  the  apostles,  and  who  had  conversed  with  men 
who  had  seen  some  of  them,  refers  as  familiarly  and 
frequently  to  the  writings  of  Paul,  as  we  are  accus¬ 
tomed  to  do  now.  The  epistle  to  the  .  Hebrews  he 
does  not  cite  in  any  of  his  writings,  which  are  now 
extant,  though  Eusebius  informs  us  that  he  had  seen 
a  work  of  his  in  which  there  are  citations  from  this 
epistle ;  but  he  does  not  say  that  he  quoted  them  as 
from  Paul.  Probably  he  participated  in  the  prejudice 
of  the  western  Church  respecting  the  author  of  this 
epistle. 

The  epistles  of  Paul  are  quoted  by  Athenagoras, 
who  lived  in  the  second  century;  also,  many  times 
by  Clement  of  Alexandria.  A  few  examples  only 
need  be  here  adduced.  “  The  apostle,  in  the  epistle 
to  the  Romans,  says,  ‘Behold,  therefore,  the  goodness 
and  severity  of  God.’**  The  blessed  Paul,  in  the  first 
epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  says,  ‘  Brethren,  be  not 
children  -in  understanding;  howbeit  in  malice  be  ye 

*  Col.  iv.  .4.  ||  2  Tim.  iv.  21. 

f  1  Thess.  v.  23.  IT  Tit.  iii.  10.  See  Lard.  Vol.  Ill 

t  2  Thess.  ii.  8.  **  Rom.  ix. 

§  1  Tim.  i.  4. 


25 


290 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


children,  but  in  understanding  be  mend*  The  apos¬ 
tle,  says  he,  calls  the  common  doctrine  of  faith  ‘  a  sa¬ 
vour  of  knowledge/!  Hence  also  Paul  says,  4  Having 
these  promises,  dearly  beloved,  let  us  cleanse  our 
hearts  from  all  filthiness  of  the  flesh  and  spirit,  per 
fecting  holiness  in  the  fear  of  Goddf  Whereupon 
Paul  also  writing  to  the  Galatians,  says,  ‘  My  little 
children,  of  whom  I  travail  in  birth  again  until  Christ 
be  formed  in  you.’§  The  blessed  apostle  says,  4 1  tes¬ 
tify  in  the  Lord  that  ye  walk  not  as  other  Gentiles 
walk/ 1|  Again,  4  Submitting  yourselves  to  one  an¬ 
other  in  the  fear  of  God.’  ”1T  He  also  quotes  the 
epistle  to  the  Philippians  expressly;  and  in  another 
place  he  refers  to  it  in  the  following  manner :  “  The 
apostle  of  the  Lord  also  exhorting  the  Macedonians, 
says,  (  The  Lord  is  at  hand ;  take  heed  that  we  be 
not  found  emptyd  ”  He  also  cites  Paul’s  epistle  to 
the  Colossians  and  to  the  Thessalonians.  And  from 
the  first  epistle  to  Timothy  he  takes  the  following 
words:  “0  Timothy*  keep  that  which  is  committed 
to  thy  trust,  avoiding  profane  and  vain  babblings, 
and  oppositions  of  science  falsely  so  called,  which 
some  preferring  have  erred  concerning  the  faith.”** 
On  which  he  observes,  that  heretics  reject  both  epis¬ 
tles  to  Timothy.  The  epistle  to  Titus  is  quoted  several 
times;  and  in  one  place  he  remarks,  “  That  Paul  had 
cited  Epimenides  the  Cretan,  in  his  epistle  to  Titus, 
after  this  manner,  ‘  One  of  themselves,  a  poet  of  their 
own,  said,  the  Cretans  are  always  liarsd  ”tt  This 
father  of  the  second  .century  also  distinctly  quotes  the 
epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  and  unhesitatingly  ascribes  it 
to  Paul.  “  Wherefore  writing  to  the  Hebrews,  who 
were  declining  from  the  faith,  Paul  says,  f  Have  ye 
need  that  any  teach  you  again  which  be  the  first 
principles  of  the  oracles  of  God,  , and  are  such  as  have 
need  of  milk  and  not  strong  meat?’  f 

Tertullian,  who  also  wrote  in  the  second  century, 
furnishes  many  testimonies  in  favour  of  Paul’s  epis- 

*  1  Cor.  xiv.  20.  §  Gal.  iv.  19.  **  1  Tim.  vi.  20,  21. 

t  2  Cor.  ii.  14.  ||  Ephes.  iv.  17,  18.  ft  Tit.  ii.  12,  13. 

t  2  Cor.  vii.  1.  ^  Phil.  iv.  5.  tt  Hcb.  v.  12. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


291 


ties.  He  expressly  refers  to  Romans  ix.  5,  where 
Christ  is  called  “  God  over  all,  blessed  for  evermore,” 
which  he  interprets  as  we  do  now.  In  his  treatise  on 
monogamy  he  computes,  that  one  hundred  and  sixty 
years  had  elapsed  since  Paul  wrote  his  epistle  to  the 
Corinthians.  He  speaks  also  of  the  second  epistle  to 
the  Corinthians,  and  of  the  opinion  entertained  by 
some,  that  it  was  the  same  person  who  was  here  for¬ 
given,  who,  in  the  first  epistle,  was  ordered  to  be 
“  delivered  to  Satan  for  the  destruction  of  the  flesh.” 
“  But  of  this,”  says  he,  “no  more  need  be  said,  if  it 
is  the  same  Paul  who  writing  to  the  Galatians  reck¬ 
ons  heresy  among  the  works  of  the  flesh;  and  who 
directs  Titus  to  reject  a  man  who  was  a  heretic  after 
the  first  admonition,  ‘  knowing  that  he  that  is  such, 
is  subverted  and  sinneth,  being  condemned  of  him¬ 
self.’  ”*  “  I  pass,”  says  he,  “  to  another  epistle, 

which  we  have  inscribed  to  the  Ephesians,  but  the 
heretics  to  the  Laodiceans.”  “According  to  the  true 
testimony  of  the  Church,  we  sflppose  this  epistle  to 
have  been  sent  to  the  Ephesians,  and  not  to  the 
Laodiceans,  but  Marcion  has  'endeavoured  to  alter 
this  inscription,  upon  pretence  of  having  made  a 
more  diligent  search  into  this  matter.”  “  But,”  says 
he,  “  the  inscriptions  are  of  no  value,  for  the  apostle 
wrote  to.  all  when  he  wrote  to  some.”  Paul  to  the 
Galatians  says,  “  For  we  through  the  Spirit  wait  for 
the  hope  of  righteousness  by  faith.”t  To  the  Phil- 
ippians  he  says,  “  If  by  any  means  I  might  attain 
unto  the  resurrection  of  the  dead;  not  as  though  I 
had  already  attained  or  were  already  perfect.”;}:  And 
writing  to  the  Colossians  he  expressly  cautions  them 
against  philosophy:  “Beware  lest  any  man  spoil 
you  through  philosophy  and  vain  deceit  after  the 
tradition  of  men,  and  not  after  the  instruction  of  the 
Spirit,”§  And  in  his  epistle  to  the  Thessalonians, 
the  apostles  adds,  “  But  of  the  times  and  seasons 
brethren  ye  have  no  need  that  I  write  unto  you.  For 
yourselves  know  perfectly,  that  the  day  of  the  Lord  so 

*'  Tit.  i.  10.  t  Phil.  iii.  11,  12. 

f  Gal.  v.  5.  §  Col.  ii.  8. 


292 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


cometh  as  a  thief  in  the  night.”*  And  in  his  second 
epistle  to  the  same  people  he  writes  with  greater 
solicitude,  “  But  I  beseech  you,  brethren,  by  the 
coming  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  that  ye  be  not  soon 
shaken  in  mind  nor  troubled.”!  And  this  charge 
Paul  has  given  to  Timothy:  “  0  Timothy,  keep  that 
which  is  committed  to  thy  trust.”! 

That  remarkable  passage  of  Tertullian,  already 
referred  to,  in  which  he  is  supposed  to  speak  of  the 
autographs  of  PauPs  epistles,  may  appropriately  be 
cited  in  this  place,  to  show  that  he  did  certainly 
write  to  those  churches  to  which  his  epistles  are  now 
inscribed.  “Well,”  says  he,  “if  you  be  willing  to 
exercise  your  curiosity  profitably  in  the  business  of 
your  salvation,  visit  the  apostolical  churches,  in  which 
the  very  chairs  of  the  apostles  still  preside,  in  which 
their  truly  authentic  letters  are  recited,  sending  forth 
the  voice  and  representing  the  countenance  of  each 
one  of  them.  Is  Achaia  near  you  ?  you  have  Cor¬ 
inth.  If  you  are  no!  far  from  Macedonia,  you  have 
Philippi;  you  have  Thessalonica.  If  you  can  visit 
Asia,  you  have  Ephesus.  And  if  you  are  near  to 
Italy,  you  have  Rome,  from  whence  also  you  may 
be  easily  satisfied.”§ 

Origen  quotes  PauPs  epistles  as  expressly  and  fre¬ 
quently  as  any  modern  writer.  To  transcribe  all  the 
testimonies  which  might  be  taken  from  this  author, 
would  fill  a  volume,  and  would  require  us  to  set 
down  the  greater  part  of  all  PauPs  epistles.  In  one 
passage  in  his  work  against  Celsus,  he  refers  to  seve¬ 
ral  of  them  in  the  following  manner.  “  Do  you  first 
of  all  explain  the  epistles  of  him  who  says  these 
things,  and  having  diligently  read  and  attended  to  the 
sense  of  the  words  there  used,  particularly  in  that  to 
the  Ephesians,  to  the  Thessalonians,  to  the  Philippi- 
ans,  to  the  Romans,  &c.”||  Origen  believed  that  the 
epistle  to  the  Ephesians  was  addressed  to  the  Church 
of  Ephesus,  for  he  cites  it  under  that  name.  And 
he  uniformly  ascribes  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  to 

*  1  Thess.  v.  1 — 3.  t  1  Tim.  \i.  20.  ||  Lard.  Vol.  I  p.  535. 

i  2  Thess.  ii.  1,2.  §  De  Praescriptione,  c.  xxxvi.  p.  245. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


293 


Paul,  from  which  he  quotes  many  passages.  And 
he  not  only  expresses  his  own  opinion  on  this  point, 
but  delivers  the  current  opinion  which  had  come 
down  from  the  fathers  who  preceded  him.  His 
words  are,  u  for  it  is  not  without  reason  that  the  an¬ 
cients  have  handed  it  down  to  us  as  Paul’s.”  Con¬ 
sidering  the  nearness  of  Origen  to  the  times  of  the 
apostles,  and  that  he  resided  near  the  people  to 
whom  it  was  sent,  perhaps  in  the  very  city,  and  that 
his  knowledge  of  ecclesiastical  and  biblical  matters 
was  more  extensive  than  that  of  any  other  man,  his 
testimony  that  this  epistle  belongs  to  Paul  ought  to 
be  decisive;  especially  as  it  is  corroborated  by  that 
of  all  the  Greek  fathers.  Eusebius,  indeed,  while  he 
admits  its  canonical  authority,  expresses  some  doubt 
about  its  authorship;  yet  in  his  writings  he  often 
quotes  it  as  Paul’s. 

Cyprian,  Victorinus,  Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  No- 
va-tus,  and  Methodius,  who  all  lived  in  the  third  cen¬ 
tury,  refer  frequently  to  Paul’s  epistles;*  but  we 
deem  it  superfluous  to  cite  further  testimonies  on  this 
subject,  except  the  full  and  decisive  testimony  of 
Jerome,  than  whom  a  more  competent  witness  could 
not  be  found.  This  father,  in  speaking  of  the  writ¬ 
ings  of  Paul,  says,  “  He  wrote  nine  epistles  to  seven 
churches.  To  the  Romans  one;  to  the  Corinthians 
two;  to  the  Galatians  one ;  to  the  Philippians  one; 
to  the  Colossians  one;  to  the  Thessalonians  two;  to 
the  Ephesians  one;  to  Timothy  two;  to  Titus  one; 
to  Philemon  one.  But  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  is 
not  thought  to  be  his,  because  of  the  difference  of 
argument  and  style;  but  rather  Barnabas’s,  as  Ter- 
tullian  thought;  or  Luke’s,  according  to  some  others; 
or  Clement’s,  who  was  afterwards  bishop  of  Rome, 
who  being  much  with  Paul,  clothed  and  adorned 
Paul’s  sense  in  his  own  language.  Or  if  it  be  Paul’s, 
he  might  decline  putting  his  name  to  it  in  the  inscrip¬ 
tion,  for  fear  of  offending  the  Jews.”!  He  seems  to 
have  entertained  the  idea  that  this  epistle  was  writ- 

*  See  Lardner’s  History  of  the  Apostles. 

f  Epist.  ad  Paulinum. 

25 * 


294 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


ten  by  Paul  in  Hebrew,  and  that  it  was  translated 
into  Greek  by  some  one  possessed  of  a  more  elegant 
style  than  Paul.  He  says,  “  he  wrote  as  a  Hebrew 
to  the  Hebrews,  it  being  his  own  language;  whence 
it  came  to  pass  that  being  translated  it  has  more  ele¬ 
gance  in  the  Greek  than  his  other  epistles.  This 
they  say  is  the  reason  of  its  differing  from  Paul’s 
other  writings.  There  is  also  an  epistle  to  the  Laodi- 
ceans,  but  it  is  rejected  by  every  body.”* 

Although  Jerome  sometimes  doubted  of  the  author¬ 
ship  of  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  which  was  pub¬ 
lished  without  the  name  of  the  author,  yet  he  com¬ 
monly  quotes  it  as  Paul’s;  and  in  his  letter  to  Evan- 
gelius,  he  writes,  “  That  all  the  Greeks  and  some  of 
the  Latins  received  this  epistle.”!  He  means,  re¬ 
ceived  it  as  Paul’s;  for  we  do  not  find  that  any  were 
for  rejecting  it  altogether  from  the  canon.  And  in  a 
letter  to  Dardanus,  he  says,  “  That  it  was  not  only 
received  as  Paul’s  by  all  the  churches  of  the  east, 
but  by  all  the  ecclesiastical  writers  in  former  times: 
though  many  ascribe  it  to  Barnabas  or  Clement.”;): 
He  also  testifies  “  that  it  was  daily  read  in  the 
churches ;  and  if  the  Latins  did  not  receive  this 
epistle  as  the  Greeks  Rejected  the  Revelation  of  John, 
yet  he  received  both;  not  influenced  so  much  by  the 
present  times,  as  the  judgment  of  ancient  writers, 
who  quote  both;  and  that  not  as  they  quote  apocry¬ 
phal  books,  and  even  heathen  writings,  but  as  cano¬ 
nical  and  ecclesiastical.” § 

Ambrose  and  Augustine  received  the  fourteen  epis¬ 
tles  of  Paul  just  as  we  do  now,||  and  since  their  time 
this  has  been  the  uniform  opinion  of  all ;  except  that 
some  modern  critics  have  revived  the  controversy 
respecting  the  author  of  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews; 
but  the  claim  of  the  apostle  Paul  has  been  vindicated 
by  many  learned  men  with  such  ability,  and  with 
arguments  so  conclusive,  that  it  may  be  hoped  that 
this  question  will  not  be  soon  stirred  again. 

*  Epist.  ad  Paulinum.  §  Lard.  Yol.  II.  p.  558. 

t  Lard.  Vol.  II.  p.  558.  j|  Ibid.  p.  581. 

t  Ibid. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


295 


The  time  when  each  of  Paul’s  epistles  was  writ¬ 
ten,  is  a  point  not  capable  of  any  certain  determina¬ 
tion;  and  as  is  usual,  in  such  cases,  the  learned  are 
divided  into  various  opinions  and  conjectures.  It 
has  commonly  been  thought  that  the  epistles  to  the 
Thessalonians  were  first  written,  but  of  late  a  prior 
date  has  been  claimed  for  the  epistle  to  the  Galatians. 
The  subject  is  not  imnortant  and  inav  be  left  to  be 
settled  by  the  critics. 


CHAPTER  XXII. 

*  '  i  * 

THE  CANONICAL  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  SEVEN  CATHOLIC  EPISTLES,  AND  OF 

THE  BOOK  OF  REVELATION. 

Why  these  epistles  received  the  denomination  of 
Catholic ,  various  reasons  have  been  assigned:  but 
none  of  them  are  very  satisfactory.  ,  Some  have  said 
that  they  were  so  called,  because  they  contained  the 
one  Catholic  doctrine  which  was  communicated  to 
the  Churches,  and  delivered  to  the  apostles  by  our 
Saviour,  and  which  might  be  read  by  the  universal 
Church.  But  surely  this  furnished  no  reason  for  dis¬ 
tinctive  appellation  of  those  seven  epistles,  since  the 
same  may  be  said  of  all  the  other  canonical  epistles. 

Others  allege,  that  they  received  this  name  because 
they  were  not  addressed  to  particular  Churches  or 
individuals,  like  the  epistles  of  Paul,  but  to  the  Ca¬ 
tholic  Church.  But  this  statement  is  not  correct;  for 
several  of  them  are  addressed  to  particular  persons. 

The  opinion  of  Dr.  Hammond  and  Dr.  Macknight 
is,  that  this  appellation  was  at  first  given  to  the  first 
epistle  of  Peter  and  first  of  John,  which  were  ad¬ 
dressed  to  Christians  generally,  and  were  universally 
received.  On  which  last  account  they  suppose  that 
they  were  originally  called  Catholic ,  to  distinguish 
them  from  such  as  were  not  universally  received; 


296  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

nut,  after  awhile,  the  other  five  being  universally 
received  also,  were  included  under  the  same  name. 

The  first  epistle  of  Peter  and  the  first  of  John, 
appear  to  have  been  circulated  and  known  at  a  very 
early  period.  The  apostolic  fathers,  Ignatius,  Poly¬ 
carp  and  Papias,  cite  passages  from  them,  without, 
however,  indicating  the  source  whence  they  were 
derived. 

Justin  Martyr  quotes  a  passage  which  is  no  where 
else  found,  but  in  the  second  epistle  of  Peter. 

Diagnetus  has  several  passages  taken  from  the  first 
epistle  of  Peter  and  the  first  of  John. 

Irenaeus  cites  from  Peter  the  following:  “Whom 
having  not  seen  ye  love,”  which  he  expressly  refers 
to  Peter.  He  also  cites  the  second  of  Peter,  and  first 
and  second  of  John.  Several  texts  are  also  quoted 
by  this  father  from  the  epistle  of  James,  but  without 
mentioning  his  name.* 

Clement  of  Alexandria  quotes  the  first  epistle  of 
Peter  often ;  the  second  sometimes ;  and  also  the 
epistle  of  Jude. 

Tertullian  often  cites  the  first  epistle  of  John,  and 
in  one  instance,  that  of  Jude;  but  has  no  quotations 
from  the  others. 

Origen  has  given  a  satisfactory  testimony  to  the 
epistle  of  James,  and  refers  to  it  in  the  following 
manner:  “  For  though  it  be  called  faith,  if  it  be  with¬ 
out  works  it  is  dead,  as  we  read  in  the  epistle  as¬ 
cribed  to  James.”  And  in  the  Latin  translation  of 
his  works,  by  Rufin,  this  epistle  is  quoted  as  divine 
scripture,  and  is  referred  to  “  James,  the  apostle, 
and  brother  of  our  Lord.”  This  learned  father  often 
cites  passages  from  the  first  of  Peter;  but  not  from 
the  second,  except  in  his  Latin  works,  the  originals 
of  which  are  lost.  In  his  book  against  Celsus,  he 
says,  “  as  it  is  said  by  Peter,  Ye  as  lively  stones  are 
built  up  a  spiritual  house.”  And  again,  “  Peter  in 
his  Catholic  epistle,  says,  ‘  put  to  death  in  the  flesh, 
hut  quickened  in  the  spirit.’  ”  His  testimony  in 
favour  of  Jude  is  also  strong.  “Jude,”  says  he, 

*  Lard.  Vol.  III.  p.  415. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  257 

"•wrote- an  epistle  of  few  lines  indeed,  but  fu.l  of 
powerful  words  and  heavenly  grace ;  who,  at  the 
beginning,  says,  ‘  Jude,  the  servant  of  Jesus  Christ, 
and  brother  of  James.’  ” 

Cyprian  has  copious  citations  from  the  first  epistle 
of  John,  and  first  of  Peter;  but  he  makes  no  men¬ 
tion  of  the  others. 

Eusebius  has  a  peculiar  opinion  respecting  the 
epistle  of  James;  he  admits  that  it  was  written  by 
James,  a  disciple  of  Christ,  but  not  by  the  apostle 
James,  yet  in  another  place  he  cites  the  words,  “  Is 
any  among  you  afflicted,  let  him  pray;  is  any  merry, 
let  him  sing  psalms;  as  the  sacred  apostle  says.” 
But  he  is  not  consistent  with  himself,  for  where 
he  distributes  the  books  into  classes,  he  places  James 
among  the  supposititous,  or  such  as  were  not  canoni¬ 
cal.  The  testimony  which  he  gives  in  his  history  is 
important.  “  One  epistle  of  Peter,  called  his  first,  is 
universally  received.  This  the  presbyters  of  ancient 
times  have  quoted  in  their  writings,  as  undoubtedly 
genuine;  but  that  called  his  second  epistle,  we  have 
been  informed,  has  not  been  received  into  the  Testa¬ 
ment;  nevertheless,  it,  appearing  to  many  to  be  use¬ 
ful,  has  been  carefully  studied  with  the  other  Scrip¬ 
tures.”*  And  in  another  passage,  “  That  called  the 
first  of  John,  and  the  first  of  Peter,  are  to  be  esteem¬ 
ed  authentic.  Of  the  controverted,  yet  well  known 
and  approved  by  the  most,  are,  that  called  the  epistle 
of  James,  that  of  Jude,  and  the  second  and  third  of 
John,  whether  they  were  written  by  the  evangelist 
or  another.” 

Athanasius  quotes  the  epistle  of  James  as  the  work 
of  the  apostle  of  that  name ;  and  cites  also  passages 
from  the  first  and  second  of  Peter,  from  the  first  and 
second  of  John,  and  also  from  Jude. 

Jerome  gives  the  following  full  testimony  to  the 
epistle  of  James:  “  James  called  the  Lord’s  brother, 
surnamed  Justus,  as  some  think  the  son  of  Joseph 
by  a  former  wife,  but  as  I  think,  rather  the  son  of 
Mary  the  sister  of  our  Lord’s  mother,  mentioned  by 

*  Lard.  Vol.  III.  c.  xix.  p.  415, 


298  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

John  in  his  gospel.  Soon  after  our  Lord’s  passion 
he  was  ordained  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  and  wrote  one 
epistle,  which  is  among  the  seven  Catholic  epistles ; 
which  too  has  been  said  to  be  published  by  another 
in  his  name,  but  gradually,  in  process  of  time,  it  has 
gained  authority.  This  is  he  of  whom  Paul  writes 
in  his  epistle  to  the  Galatians,  and  who  is  often  men¬ 
tioned  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles;  and  sometimes, 
in  the  4  gospels  according  to  the  Hebrews,’  lately 
translated  by  me  into  Greek  and  Latin.”  Augustine 
received  all  the  Catholic  epistles.  He  quotes  that  of 
James,  as  the  production  of  the  apostle  of  that  name. 
Both  the  epistles  of  Peter  are  often  cited  by  him; 
also  the  three  epistles  of  John;  and  he  quotes  Jude, 
and  calls  him  an  apostle. 

In  the  works  of  Ephrem,  the  Syrian,  who  lived 
and  wrote  voluminously  in  the  fourth  century,  there 
are  found  express  quotations  from  the  epistle  of 
James,  the  second  of  Peter,  the  second  and  third  of 
John,  and  from  Jude,  as  well  as  abundant  citations 
from  first  Peter,  and  first  John;  so  that  he  received 
as  scripture,  the  whole  seven  Catholic  epistles. 

The  book  of  Revelation ,  for  a  season,  fell  into 
considerable  discredit  in  the  ancient  Church;  princi¬ 
pally  on  account  of  the  support  which  it  seemed  to 
give  to  the  extravagant  doctrines  of  the  Millenarians; 
and  it  is  not  found  in  a  number  of  the  ancient  cata- 

i 

logues.  But  another  reason  why  it  was  permitted  to 
lie  in  obscurity  was,  the  deeply  mysterious  nature  of 
its  contents;  on  which  account,  it  was  not  commonly 
read  in  the  Churches.  And  some  modem  writers 
have  ventured  to  question  its  right  to  a  place  in  the 
sacred  canon.  But  when  its  evidence  comes  to  be 
examined,  it  is  found,  that  so  far  as  early  testimony 
goes,  it  is  not  inferior  to  that  of  any  other  book  in 
the  New  Testament. 

Both  Hermas  and  Papias  appear  to  have  been 
acquainted  with  this  book;  as  the  former  imitates 
several  of  its  descriptions,  and  makes  repeated  men¬ 
tion  of  the  “book  of  life,”  and  of  those,  whose  names 
are  written  in  it ;  and  the  latter  seems  to  have  deri- 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  299 

ved  some  of  his  opinions  from  a  too  literal  translation 
of  some  things  in  this  book. 

But  Justin  Martyr  is  the  first  who  makes  explicit 
mention  of  the  Revelation.  His  words  are,  “  And  a 
man  from  among  us,  by  name  John,  one  of  the  apos¬ 
tles  of  Christ,  in  the  Revelation  made  to  him,  has 
prophesied  that  the  believers  in  our  Christ  shall  live 
a  thousand  years  at  Jerusalem,  and  after  that  shall 
be  the  general  and  indeed  eternal  resurrection  and 
judgment  of  all  men  together.”* 

In  the  epistle  of  the  Church  of  Lyons  and  Vienne, 
in  France,  which  was  written  before  the  close  of  the 
second  century,  there  is  found  an  evident  quotation 
from  this  book:  “  For  he  was  indeed  a  genuine  dis¬ 
ciple  of  Christ,  following  the  Lamb ,  whithersoever 
he  goethR 

Irenseus  expressly  quotes  the  Revelation,  and  as¬ 
cribes  it  to  John  the  apostle.  u  The  visions  in  this 
book,”  he  says,  “  were  seen  no  long  time  before,  at 
the  end  of  the  reign  of  Domitian'.”t  And  in  a  passage 
preserved  by  Eusebius,  he  speaks  of  “  the  exact  and 
ancient  copies  of  this  book,  which  were  confirmed, 
likewise,  by  the  concurring  testimony  of  those  who 
had  seen  John.” 

Theophilus  of  Antioch,  as  we  are  assured  by  Eu¬ 
sebius,  cited  testimonies  from  the  Apocalypse,  in  his 
work  against  Hermo genes.  This  book  is  also  quoted 
by  Clement  of  Alexandria.  In  one  passage,  he  says, 
“  Such  a  one,  though  here  on  earth  he  be  not  much 
honoured  with  the  first  seat,  shall  ‘sit  upon  the 
twenty -four  thrones/  judging  the  people,  as  John 
says  in  the  Revelation.” f  In  another  place,  he  cites 
from  it  as  the  work  of  an  apostle.  Tertullian  also 
quoted  many  things  from  the  Apocalypse;  and  seems 
to  have  entertained  no  doubt  of  its  being  the  work 
of  the  apostle  John. 

Hippolytus,  of  the  third  century,  who  had  great 
celebrity,  both  in  the  eastern  and  western  Church, 

*  Lard.  Vol.  III.  c.  xxii.  p.  447.  t  Lard.  Vol.  III.  p.  449 

t  Ibid.  p.  448. 


300  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

not  only  received  the  Revelation  as  the  work  of  the 
apostle  John,  but  appears  to  have  written  a  commen¬ 
tary  on  the  book,  as  is  manifest  by  the  monument  of 
this  father,  dug  up  in  the  city  of  Rome,  in  the  year 
1551.  His  name,  it  is  true,  is  effaced  from  this 
monument,  but  it  contains  a  catalogue  of  all  the 
works  ascribed  to  him  by  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  and 
some  not  mentioned  by  them,  among  which  is  one 
“of  the  Gospel  of  John ,  and  the  Revelation” 

Origen,  who  was  well  acquainted  with  the  Revela¬ 
tion,  denominates  the  author,  “  Evangelist  and  Apos¬ 
tle,”  and  on  account  of  the  predictions  which  it  con¬ 
tains,  “a  prophet”  also.  Origen  declared  his  purpose 
to  write  a  commentary  on  this  book;  but  if  he  carried 
his  purpose  into  execution,  the  work  has  not  reached 
our  times,  nor  is  there  any  mention  of  it  by  ecclesias¬ 
tical  writers  who  came  after  him. 

But  Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  one  of  the  most 
learned  men  of  the  age,  has  furnished  more  informa¬ 
tion  respecting  the  canonical  authority  of  this  book 
than  any  other  person.  It  is  from  him  we  learn  the 
fact  referred  to  above,  that  it  was  on  account  of  the 
use  made  of  this  book  by  the  Chiliasts  or  Millena- 
rians  that  it  fell  into  partial  and  temporary  discredit. 
These  errorists  were  numerous  in  the  district  of  Arsi- 
noe,  in- Egypt,  where  Dionysius  visited  them,  and 
took  great  pains  to  reclaim  them  from  their  errors, 
and  his  efforts  were  not  ineffectual,  for  he  had  the 
pleasure  of  seeing  many  of  them  return  to  the  or¬ 
thodox  faith.  He  informs  us,  that  before  his  time, 
many  rejected  this  book  altogether,  and  ascribed  it 
to  Cerinthus,  the  heretic.  He  professes  for  himself 
to  believe,  that  the  Revelation  was  an  inspired  book, 
and  written  by  a  man  whose  name  was  John,  but  a 
different  person  from  the  apostle  John.  The  only 
reason  which  he  assigns  for  this  peculiar  opinion  is, 
the  difference  of  the  style  from  that  of  the  apostle  in 
his  other  works.  In  answer  to  which,  the  judicious 
Lardner  remarks,  that  supposing  the  alleged  differ¬ 
ence  to  exist,  it  will  not  prove  that  the  apostle  John 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  SOI 

is  not  the  writer,  because  the  style  of  prophecy  is 
altogether  different  from  that  of  historical  narrative, 
and  equally  so,  from  the  epistolary  style.  But  this 
learned  and  accurate  writer  denies  that  there  is  such 
a  difference  of  style,  as  to  furnish  any  solid  reason 
for  this  objection;  and  in  confirmation  of  his  opinion, 
he  descends  to  particulars,  and  shows,  that  there  are 
some  striking  points  of  resemblance  between  the  lan¬ 
guage  of  the  Apocalypse,  and  the  acknowledged 
writings  of  the  apostle  John.* * * § 

Cyprian  received  the  book  of  Revelation  as  of 
canonical  authority,  as  will  appear  by  the  following 
citations  from  it.  “Hear  in  the  Revelation,  the  voice 
of  thy  Lord  reproving  such  men  as  these:  f  Thou 
sayest,  I  am  rich  and  increased  in  goods,  and  have 
need  of  nothing,  and  Imowest  not  that  thou  art 
wretched,  and  miserable,  and  poor,  and  blind,  and 
naked.’ 99  Again:  “So  in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  by 
which  the  Lord  would  have  us  to  be  instructed  and 
warned,  is  the  harlot  city  described.”  “That  waters 
signify  people,  the  divine  Scriptures  show  in  the 
Revelation.”t 

That  Lactantius  received  this  book  is  evident  from 
all  his  writings;  especially  those  in  which  he  attempts 
from  its  predictions  to  foretell  “  the  future  destinies 
of  the  Church. Victorinus  also,  who  lived  to¬ 
wards  the  close  of  the  third  century,  often  quotes 
this  book,  and  ascribes  it  to  John  the  apostle. § 

Thus  it  appears,  that  until  the  beginning  of  the 
fourth  century,  the  book  of  Revelation  was  univer¬ 
sally  received  as  canonical;  and  only  one  man  ex¬ 
presses  any  doubt  about  the  apostle  John  being  the 
author ;  and  he  ascribes  it  to  another  John,  a  disciple 
of  our  Lord,  who  also  was  an  inspired  man.  And 
although  it  now  fell  into  some  neglect  and  discredit, 
yet  no  man  of  any  authority  in  the  Church,  went  so 
far  as  to  reject  it  altogether.  Eusebius,  after  giving 

*  Lardner,  Vol.  L  c.  xliii.  p.  633. 

f  Ibid.  Vol.  II.  p.  26,  27. 

f  Ibid.  Vol.  II.  c.  lxiv.  p.  292. 

§  Ibid.  Vol.  II.  p.  290. 

26 


302 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


a  catalogue  of  the  other  books,  says,  “  After  these, 
if  it  be  thought  fit,  may  be  placed  the  Revelation, 
concerning  which  there  are  different  opinions.” 

Athanasius  gives  the  following  testimony:  “Domi- 
tian  in  the  fourteenth  year  of  his  reign,  raising  the 
second  persecution  after  Nero,  John  was  banished 
into  the  isle  of  Patmos,  when  he  wrote  the  Revela¬ 
tion  which  Irenseus  and  Justin  Martyr  explain.”* 

Augustine  received  the  Revelation,  and  frequently 
quotes  it.  He  also  ascribed  it  to  the  same  John  who 
wrote  the  gospel  and  epistles.  Jerome  translated  it 
into  Latin  with  the  other  books  of  the  New  Testa¬ 
ment.  The  evidence  of  the  canonical  authority  of 
this  prophetic  vision  is  therefore  as  strong  as  that  of 
any  book  in  the  New  Testament;  and  the  time  is 
coming  when  the  seals  which  have  so  long  closed  up 
its  meaning  shall  be  broken,  and  the  Apocalypse 
will  appear  indeed  to  be  a  wonderful  Revelation  of 
events  of  the  greatest  importance,  which  are  now 
future.  The  study  of  this  portion  of  sacred  Scripture 
should  not  be  discouraged ;  for  as  the  great  wheel  of 
Providence  revolves,  the  mystic  page  will  become 
more  and  more  illuminated,  and  the  events  predicted 
will  be  so  clearly  developed,  that  all  who  are  endued 
with  spiritual  understanding  will  clearly  see,  by  the 
developments  which  will  take  place,  that  the  sealed 
book  is  opened,  and  that  the  purposes  of  God  to¬ 
wards  his  Church  are  in  the  progress  of  full  and 
rapid  accomplishment ;  even  “  the  things  that  are, 
and  the  things  which  shall  be  hereafter.”! 

*  Lardner,  Vol.  II,  401.  t  Rev.  i.  19. 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


303 


CHAPTER  XXIII. 

RECAPITULATION  OF  EVIDENCE  ON  THE  CANON  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT 

The  subject  of  the  canon  of  the  New  Testament  may 
properly  be  concluded  by  a  few  general  remarks. 

1.  The  constitution  of  the  canon  of  the  New  Tes¬ 
tament  did  not  require  the  judgment  or  sanction  of 
any  council,  synod,  or  church,  except  as  they  might 
be  witnesses  that  the  books  were  written  by  men 
who  were  known  to  be  inspired.  Every  book  writ¬ 
ten  by  an  apostle  had  a  right  to  a  place  in  the  canon 
as  soon  as  published.  The  sacred  books  were  there¬ 
fore  canonical  before  they  were  collected  together 
into  a  volume.  One  of  Paul’s  epistles,  as  soon  as 
received  by  the  Church  to  which  it  was  sent,  had  as 
much  authority  as  it  ever  could  have,  and  possessed 
this  authority,  if  that  Church  were  not  at  the  time  in 
possession  of  any  other  book.  The  canon  was  con¬ 
stituted,  or  compiled,  when  the  last  inspired  volume 
was  published.  And  as  the  apostle  John  undoubted¬ 
ly  survived  the  other  apostles,  and  wrote  last,  when 
he  produced  his  last  writing,  whichever  it  might  be, 
the  canon  was  closed.  And  as  this  must  have  been 
prior  to  his  death,  so  it  may  be  said  with  certainty, 
that  the  canon  of  the  New  Testament  was  completed 
before  the  death  of  John.  And  as  all  the  books  were 
in  circulation  while  he  was  living,  the  Church  could 
enjoy  the  unspeakable  privilege  of  having  his  infalli¬ 
ble  opinion  respecting  any  and  all  of  these  books. 
This  will  sufficiently  account  for  the  universal  con¬ 
sent  with  which  these  books  were  received  in  every 
part  of  the  Church.  As  he  gave  his  sanction  to  the 
other  three  gospels,  so  doubtless  he  would  do  to  the 
whole  sacred  canon.  Accordingly,  we  find  no  con¬ 
troversy  in  the  early  ages  of  the  Church,  respecting 
the  canon.  Doubt  was  entertained  by  some  respect- 


304  EVIDENCES  OF  CIIRISTIANITF. 

ing  a  few  of  those  books  now  in  the  canon,  which 
resulted  in  a  general  acquiescence  in  their  claims, 
after  the  subject  was  impartially  examined ;  but  res¬ 
pecting  all  other  books  there  was  a  unanimous  con¬ 
sent.  This  leads  to  the  remark, 

2.  That  the  writings  of  the  apostles  were  from 
the  beginning  carefully  distinguished  from  all  other 
hooks.  They  were  denominated,  “  Scripture,”  di¬ 
vine  Scripture — inspired  writings — the  gos¬ 
pels — the  apostles — oracles  of  the  Lord — di¬ 
vine  fountains,  &c.,  &c.  The  fathers  were  not  too 
credulous  in  regard  to  this  matter,  but  used  all  care 
to  search  into  the  claims  of  such  books  as  professed 
to  be  from  the  apostles. 

3.  These  books,  when  written,  did  not  lie  in  ob¬ 
scurity,  but  were  publicly  read  in  the  churches ;  and 
were  sought  with  avidity  by  the  people,  and  read 
with  veneration,  not  only  by  the  learned  but  by  com¬ 
mon  Christians;  for  the  idea  of  locking  up  the  holy 
Scriptures  from  the  people  seems  to  have  occurred  to 
no  one.  That  these  canonical  books  were  thus  read 
in  the  churches  may  be  proved  by  the  testimony  of 
Justin  Martyr,  Tertullian,  Eusebius,  Cyprian,  and 
Augustine;  and  no  other  books  received  the  same 
veneration  and  attention — none  others  were  spoken 
of  as  Scripture — as  inspired.  When  any  other 
pieces  were  read  in  public  for  instruction,  the  fathers 
were  pointedly  careful  to  distinguish  these  from  the 
canonical  hooks. 

4.  In  all  the  controversies  which  arose  in  the 
Church,  these  books  were  appealed  to  by  all  parties, 
as  decisive  authority,  unless  we  except  some  of  the 
very  worst  heretics,  who,  to  maintain  their  opinions, 
mutilated  the  Scriptures,  and  rejected  such  as  plainly 
condemned  their  impious  tenets.  But  most  of  the 
heretics  endeavoured  to  maintain  their  opinions  by 
the  writings  of  the  New  Testament.  This  was  the 
case  in  regard  to  the  Valentinians,  the  Montanists, 
the  Sabellians,  the  Artemonites,  the  Arians,  the  Pe¬ 
lagians,  and  the  Priscillianists.  None  of  these  called 
in  question  the  authority  of  the  sacred  books. 


EVIDENCES  OE  CHRISTIANITY. 


305 


5.  It  is  an  argument  of  great  force,  that  even  the 
avowed  enemies  of  Christianity,  who  wrote  against 
the  truth,  refer  to  the  books  now  in  the  canon,  as 
those  received  as  sacred  by  Christians.  These  ene¬ 
mies  of  the  gospel  refer  to  matters  contained  in  these 
books,  and  some  of  them  mention  several  of  them  by 
name. 

Celsus,  who  lived  and  wrote  less  than  a  hundred 
years  after  the  age  of  the  apostles,  says,  as  his  words 
are  quoted  by  Origen,  who  answered  him,  “  I  could 
say  many  things  concerning  the  affairs  of  Jesus,  and 
those,  too,  different  from  what  has  been  written  by 
the  disciples  of  Jesus,  but  I  purposely  omit  them.” 
In  another  place  he  says,  “  These  things,  then,  wo 
have  alleged  to  you  of  your  own  writings.” 

Porphyry  also,  from  the  fragments  of  his  writings 
which  remain,  appears  to  have  been  well  acquainted 
with  the  four  gospels;  for  the  objections  which  he 
brings  against  Christianity  are  directed  against  things 
still  found  in  these  gospels. 

The  emperor  Julian,  called  the  Apostate,  mentions 
by  name  Matthew  and  Luke,  and  cites  various  things 
out  of  the  gospels.  He  also  mentions  John,  and  says, 
“none  of  Christ’s  disciples  besides  has  ascribed  to 
him  the  creation  of  the  world;”  “and  that  neither 
Matthew,  nor  Luke,  nor  Mark,  had  dared  to  call 
Jesus,  God;”  “that  John  wrote  later  than  the  other 
evangelists,  and  at  a  time  when  a  great  number  of 
men  in  the  countries  of  Greece  and  Italy  were  con¬ 
verted.”  Now  if  these  books  had  not  been  genuine, 
would  not  these  learned  and  powerful  opponents 
have  known  the  fact,  and  would  they  not  have  ex¬ 
posed  the  fraud?  But  they  silently  acquiesce  in  the 
genuineness  of  the  gospels,  and  speak  of  them  as  the 
writings  of  the  disciples  of  Christ,  with  as  little  hesi¬ 
tation  as  Christians  themselves. 

6.  The  testimony  which  we  have  adduced  is  not 
only  sufficient  to  demonstrate  that  these  books  were 
originally  written  by  the  men  to  whom  they  have 
always  been  ascribed,  but  also,  that  the  books  which 
were  in  the  hands  of  early  Christians  contained  the 

26* 


306  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

same  things  which  are  now  found  written  in  them. 
Excepting  about  half  a  dozen  texts,  the  genuineness 
of  which  is  disputed,  because  the  manuscripts  and 
versions  vary;  as  far  as  can  be  judged  from  numer¬ 
ous  quotations,  from  all  the  early  versions,  and  from 
the  ancient  manuscripts  which  have  come  down  to 
us,  no  material  change  has  taken  place  in  these  wri¬ 
tings.  It  is  true,  the  fathers  in  some  instances  ap¬ 
pear  to  have  quoted  from  memory,  and  in  others  to 
have  interpreted  the  words  of  the  sacred ,  writers 
differently  from  what  we  do,  hut  all  evidence  goes 
to  show  that  the  Scriptures  of  the  New  Testament 
have  come  down  to  us  in  their  original  integrity, 
save  those  errors  which  arose  from  the  carelessness 
or  ignorance  of  transcribers;  but  even  in  regard  to 
these,  by  means  of  the  multitude  of  copies  of  the 
Greek  text,  and  of  early  versions,  with  the  help  of 
numerous  quotations  made  in  Africa,  Asia,  and  Eu¬ 
rope,  the-  correct  reading  can  usually  be  ascertained 
with  very  considerable  certainty.  It  is  probable  that 
almost  every  sentence  in  some  books  of  the  New 
Testament  has  been  cited  or  referred  to  by  one  or 
other  of  the  fathers.  Let  any  one  only  cast  his  eye 
over  a  table  of  texts  quoted  by  Cyprian,  Origen,  Ter- 
tullian,  or  any  other  extensive  writer  among  them, 
and  he  will  be  convinced  that  a  large  part  of  the 
New  Testament  could  be  collected  from  their  wri¬ 
tings. 

As  the  apocryphal  books  of  the  New  Testament, 
though  very  numerous,  are  never  connected  with  the 
sacred  volume,  and  as  none  no  w  plead  for  the  canon¬ 
ical  authority  of  any  of  these  books,  there  is  no 
necessity,  in  treating  of  the  evidences  of  Christianity, 
to  enter  into  any  discussion  respecting  them.  And 
I  would  beg  leave  to  refer  any  who  may  feel  a  curi¬ 
osity  to  inquire  into  their  character,  and  to  have  some 
specimens  of  their  style  and  spirit,  to  Jones’  “  New 
method  of  settling  the  canon  of  the  New  Testament;” 
or  the  volume  which  the  present  writer  compiled  on 
the  subject  of  the  canon. 

Having  brought  this  “  View  of  the  Evidences  4  . 


EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  307 

Christianity”  to  a  close,  I  would  entreat  the  reader, 
who  has  accompanied  me  thus  far,  not  to  suffer  his 
mind  to  he  disturbed,  or  his  faith  unsettled,  by  objec- 
.  tions  which  ingenious  men  may  raise,  which  he  may 
not  be  able  to  answer.  Objections  may  be  made  to 
the  most  certain  principles  of  science,  and  even  to 
what  we  know  by  consciousness,  and  the  evidence 
of  our  senses;  but  though  we  cannot  remove  all  diffi¬ 
culties,  yet  we  do  not  distrust  our  intuitive  judg¬ 
ments,  our  senses,  and  the  clear  deductions  of  reason. 
Many  of  the  objections  of  infidels,  however,  are  easily 
answered,  and  have  been  fully  answered  again  and 
again;  but  they  still  throw  back  the  blunted  Weapons, 
so  often  repelled,  as  though  they  had  never  been 
used  before.  There  is  no  room,  in  this  brief  outline, 
to  enter  on  a  consideration  of  the  popular  objections 
of  deists.  Such  a  work  would  itself  require  a  volume, 
and  he  who  executes  such  a  work  skilfully,  will 
deserve  well  of  the  Christian  community. 

One  word  more  to  the  candid  reader.  Rest  not, 
I  entreat  you,  in  a  mere  rational  conviction  of  the 
truth  of  the  gospel,  but  speedily  reduce  your  faith  to 
practice.  Embrace  the  gospel,  as  well  as  assent  to 
its  truth.  If  Christianity  is  true,  it  is  the  most  im¬ 
portant  concern  in  the  world.  Avail  yourselves  of 
its  precious  invitations;  obey  its  salutary  precepts, 
and  escape  from  the  dangers  of  which  it  gives  you 
warning. 

If  the  Bible  is  written  by  the  inspiration  of  God, 
how  highly  should  we  prize  this  sacred  volume,  and 
how  devoutly  and  diligently  should  we  study  its  con¬ 
tents!  “Search  the  Scriptures.”  Pray  for  divine 
illumination,  that  you  may  understand  them.  That 
man  who  is  pronounced  “  blessed,”  meditates  in  the 
law  day  and  night.  “  The  law  of  the  Lord  is  per¬ 
fect,  converting  the  soul;  the  testimonies  of  the  Lord 
are  sure,  making  wise  the  simple.”  What  is  said 
at  the  beginning  and  at  the  close  of  the  last  book  in 
the  canon,  may  be  well  applied  to  the  whole  Bible: 
“  Blessed  is  he  that  readeth,  and  they  that  hear  the 


308  EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

words  of  this  prophecy,  and  keep  those  things  which 
are  written  therein. 

“For  I  testify  unto  every  one  that  heareth  the 
words  of  the  prophecy  of  this  book,  if  any  man  shall 
add  unto  these  things,  God  shall  add  unto  him  the 
plagues  that  are  written  in  this  book.  And  if  any 
man  shall  take  away  from  the  words  of  the  book  of 
this  prophecy,  God  shall  take  away  his  part  out  of 
the  book  of  life,  and  out  of  the  Holy  City,  and  from 
the  things  which  are  written  in  this  book.” 


THE  END. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS-URBANA 


3  0112  003230916 


